Microsoft Word - Full NSA coding notes.doc

Uppsala conflict data expansion

Non-state actor information

Codebook

Conflict: Bolivia-ELN (conflict id: 1010, dyad 10)

In November of 1966, Ernesto “Che” Guevara, the famous leader of guerilla movements across Latin
America, including in Cuba, came to Bolivia with some other Cuban revolutionaries to organize a leftist
insurgency there. In early 1967 the government learned of his organization and with the help of United States
military advisers began organizing a military response to it (prior to this time the Bolivian army was very weak
and did not have the capacity to wage war in the periphery where Guevara’s forces were). Guevara did not
have the success he was expecting at organizing new forces and once the Bolivian army was sufficiently
trained to launch an attack, the movement was quickly defeated. On October 8, 1967, Guevara was killed and
by the end of the month the guerrilla movement had been defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

There were Bolivian communist parties that were banned after the guerrilla uprising broke out. However,
there had been tensions between Guevara and the leadership of those parties so it is not clear that there was
an actual link.

Rebestimate: 100
Rebestlow: 50
Rebesthigh: 200
Rebstrength: much weaker

It is not clear exactly how many guerillas Guevara had on his side. The Cambridge History of Latin America
says that he never had more than 50 guerillas, while Keesing’s Contemporary Archives reports that the
government identified at least 200 guerillas in April, 1967. Regardless of the actual number, however, it is
clear that the guerilla army had many fewer troops than the army.

Mobcap: low
Armsproc: moderate
Fightcap: low

At the beginning of the war, the guerillas had arms that were as good as or better than that possess by the
Bolivian army. However, Guevara ran into major problems mobilizing peasants to support him and the lack
of sufficient numbers of troops hindered the fighting capacity of the guerillas, who went fighting actually
came to the countryside were no match for the government.

Sources:

•

Whitehead, Laurence (1991). “Bolivia since 1930.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.

The Cambridge History of Latin

America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives.

Conflict: Bolivia-National Revolutionary Movement (conflict id: 1010, dyad 20)

In elections in May, 1951, the National Revolutionary Movement (MNR) party won the majority of

seats, however, the elections were annulled and a military junta took power. On April 9, 1952, the MNR
organized a violent insurrection in La Paz against the junta government. If the military had thrown the full
weight of its support behind the government, the insurrection would have been crushed. However, the police
force in La Paz decided to support the MNR, and the government was quickly overthrown. By April 11, the
MNR had established control throughout much of Bolivia and on April 13 a new government was formed.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The MNR was a political party and had participated in elections in the previous year.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear

None of the sources available had any figures on the number of troops supporting the MNR.

Rebstrength: weaker

The MNR would not have been able to take over La Paz if the military police force had not joined them.

New start date: April 9, 1952
New end date: April 11, 1952

Uppsala has this war as occurring in 1951, but that is a mistake.

Sources:

•

Whitehead, Laurence (1991). “Bolivia since 1930.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.

The Cambridge History of Latin

America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives.

Conflict: Bolivia-Popular Revolutionary Movement (conflict id 1010, dyad 30)

In May 1946, the Democratic Anti-Fascist Front (FDA) was created as an organization of opponents of the
current regime, both on the Left and Right. In June 1946, the FDA began organizing a strikes and revolts
against the government that escalated into major street fighting on July 20. On July 21, a street mob burst into
the capital and killed the president and six of his closest advisers. The next day a new government was
formed.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The FDA was a legal political organization and had general control over the striking workers. However, there
was also a mob mentality to the violence that was not totally controlled.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear
None of the sources available give an indication of the number of people participating in the strikes or in the
street violence.

Centcontrol: yes
Strengthcent: moderate

The striking and revolting workers were generally controlled by a political party, the FDA.

Mobcap: moderate
Armscap: unclear
Fightcap: moderate

The FDA was able to mobilize workers to strike and riot across a range of professions including teachers,
students, and railworkers. Its not clear that they had an inability to procure arms. Their fighting capacity in
terms of the ability to wage street warfare was moderate.

Sources:

•

Whitehead, Laurence (1991). “Bolivia since 1930.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.

The Cambridge History of Latin

America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Cambodia-France (conflict id 1020)

Conflict Summary: In the aftermath of World War II, France faced violent uprisings for independence in
Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. The Cambodian campaign, which began in 1945, was one of the less violent in
the region, as the Khmer Issarak, the violent left-wing anti-colonial movement was quite weak at its inception.
However, supported by the Viet Minh, the group grew in power and by 1952 it controlled one-sixth of the
country. In 1953, France finally granted full independence to Indochina, and the Khmer Issarak continued to
grow.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: yes
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

In the late 1940s, Indonesia was granted partial independence with a king and a national assembly. Two main
parties competed in the national assembly, the Democrats, a left-wing party who won the majority of the
seats and the Liberals, a party primarily gaining support for the upper class. The Democrats had loose ties to
the Khmer Issarak, one of the factors making them more popular with the population. In the early 1950s, a
Khmer People’s Revolutionary party (KPRP) was formed modeled on the Vietnamese communist party.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 7,000
Rebstrength: low

In 1952, French intelligence estimated that 5,000 Khmer Issarak forces were controlled by the KPRP.
However, Chandler (1992, p. 181) reports that this estimate was probably an underestimate. It is included as
the low estimate with one thousand added for the main estimate and 2000 for the high estimate. Regardless
of the actual number of troops, it is clear that the Khmer Issarak could never defeat the French in full-blown
military combat, however, the fact that the French were fighting so many battles in Indochina, many against
much stronger opponents, made continued occupation too costly.

Sources:

•

Chandler, David P. (1992).

A History of Cambodia

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

•

Cambodia: A Country Study

(1990). Third Edition. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: China-PLA (conflict id 1030)

Conflict Summary: The three-year civil war between the nationalist Guomindang government, led by Chiang
Kai-Shek, and the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Peoples Liberation Army (PLA), led by, among others,
Mao Zedong, was really the continuation of a decades long struggle for control over China. Fighting between
the CCP and the Goumindang began in April 1927 and continued for ten years until a United Front was
formed between the two groups to challenge Japanese occupation during World War II. In the aftermath of
the Japanese surrender, however, the alliance broke down, and the nationalist government, recognizing the
growing power of the Chinese communists in the countryside decided to attack in 1946 to try to defeat the
communist party before it got too strong. However, despite a strong advantage in troop strength and level of
armaments, and despite a string of initial military victories, the government armies were never able to stop the
growing mobilization of the CCP. By 1947 the tide had turned and it became increasingly clear that the PLA
could out mobilize the government armies and it gained increasing numbers of troops. In 1948, Mao Zedong
claimed that an additional 1.6 million Chinese had joined the PLA over the last two years, a number
approximately twice what the PLA had in 1946. Finally, on October 1, 1949, the PLA took power and
declared the establishment of the People’s Republic of China.

Notes on Coding:

Rebpolwing: unclear
Rebpolwinglegal: no

This variable is difficult to code for this case. Clearly, the Communist Party had a political platform and acted
politically to try to advance its goals of radical egalitarianism in the areas of China that it controlled. However,
the PLA did not make any attempt to compete in elections, instead relying on popular mobilization and
military victory to advance its cause.

Rebestimate: 1 million
Rebestlow: 800,000
Rebesthigh: 1.2 million
Rebstrength: weaker

There is not a clear indication of the number of troops the PLA possessed throughout the conflict. However,
at the time of the outbreak in 1946, the government had 2.5 million troops, and varying reports indicate that
this is somewhere between 2 and 3 times the number of troops the communists had. So, the estimate for
PLA troop strength is 1 million at the time the fighting broke out. It is clear that over the course of the
fighting the government lost forces and the PLA gained them, however, at the time of outbreak the
government was clearly stronger.

Mobcap: high

The PLA clearly had a much stronger ability to rally Chinese to its side and was able to mobilize new forces at
a much faster rate than the government.

Armsproc: moderate

When the war broke out, the government had a much greater arms capacity. However, the communists were
able to seize weapons from many of the 700,000 surrendering Japanese troops in the aftermath of World War
II which strengthened their fighting capacity.

Terrname: Northwest China
Efftercontrol: high

In the areas of northwest China that it controlled, the Chinese Communist Party was able to enact policies
such as land-reform to try to advance its goal of radical egalitarianism.

Sources:

•

Patrick Brogan (1998).

World Conflicts: Fighting Never Stopped

. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

•

Moise, Edwin E. (1986).

Modern China: A History

. New York: Longman.

•

Pepper, Suzanne (1991). “The KMT-CCP conflict, 1945-1949” in Eastman, Lloyd E., Jerome Ch’en,
Suzanne Pepper and Lyman P. Van Slyke, Eds.,

The Nationalist Era in China 1927-1949

Conflict: Greece (conflict id 1040)

Conflict Summary: The Greek civil war of 1946-1949 actually represented the “third round” of fighting
between Communist and right-wing/monarchist forces in Greece. During World War II, there had been two
major guerilla movements fighting the Axis occupation of Greece and these groups became the precursors to
the combatants in the Greek Civil War. In 1946, the Democratic Army of Greece (DSE) began an insurgent
campaign against the monarchist/republican government of Greece, backed by promises of aid by
Yugoslavia. While initially the DSE was highly outnumbered by the Greek government, the latter’s control
over the whole country was weak enough that it could not protect all of the villages from hit and run tactics.
In 1947, the DSE made advances as it increased the size of its forces almost three-fold and began to exercise
political control throughout more of the territory it controlled. At the end of 1947, the United States, seeking
to prevent a communist takeover in Greece, began providing large amounts of aid to the Greek government.
1948 was primarily a year of stalemate between the two groups, but by 1949 the Greek government had
gained the upper hand and on October 16, 1949, the DSE declared a cease-fire and stopped fighting.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: unclear
Rebpolwinglegal: no

These variables are difficult to code. The DSE clearly had a political agenda and played a somewhat political
role in the area it controlled, even holding elections, but it did not try to gain power in the country politically,
rather through armed insurrection.

Rebestimate: 23,000
Rebestlow: 4,000
Rebesthigh: 28,000
Rebstrength: weaker

O’Ballance provides a number of estimates for the troop strength of the DSE at different points across the
conflict. For the bulk of the conflict, the DSE had over 20,000 troops in the field, and so I have estimated the
rebel forces at 23,000. O’Ballance's estimates are as follows:

•

March 1946: 4,000

•

October 1946: 6,000

•

December 1946: 7,000

•

March 1947: 13,000

•

Summer 1947: 23,000

•

March 1948: 28,000

•

End of 1948: 21,000

Fightcap: weaker

The DSE was definitely weaker than the Greek government supported by first Britain and then the United
States, in that it never had the potential to capture the entire country. However, it did have the ability to
evade total defeat by waging an insurgency war.

Sources

•

O’Ballance, Edgar (1966).

The Greek Civil War

1944-1949. New York, NY: Frederick A. Praeger.

•

Iatrides, John O., ED. (1981).

Greece in the 1940s: A Nation in Crisis

. Hanover, UK: University Press of

New England.

•

Close, David H. (1995).

The Greek Civil War

. New York, NY: Longman.

Conflict: Indonesia-Netherlands (conflict id 1050)

Conflict Summary: An anti-colonial movement that had been growing in Indonesia in the early twentieth
century saw an opportunity for achieving its goals in the aftermath of World War II. The Indonesian
archipelago had been seized by Japan in the 1940s and as the Japanese defeat seemed imminent, Indonesian
politicians began assembling a government and setting the stage for independence. The Netherlands,
however, was eager to reassert colonial rule and in the aftermath of World War II Indonesia was placed under
the control of the Allied powers. In late 1945, clashes between Indonesian nationalists and British forces
created high casualties and in 1946 a cease-fire was brokered between the nationalists and the Dutch with a
sort of commonwealth political arrangement for the archipelago. In 1947 the Netherlands, claiming violations
of the ceasefire agreement, attacked and took much of the archipelago by the end of the year. However, the
severity of the Dutch response provoked international outrage, and by 1949 the United Nations had brokered
an agreement in which the Netherlands agreed to transfer sovereignty to the Republic, which occurred on
December 27, 1949.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: yes
Rebpolwinglegal: no

In this case, both parties were fighting to see who would be the government of Indonesia, would it be a
colonial power or an independent nationalist government. The rebels, in this case, were the nationalist
government trying to assert control and so they were a political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 200,000

This estimate is from onwar.com.

Rebstrength: low

Indonesia would have had a much harder time defeating the Dutch and gaining full independence without the
role of the international community.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: moderate

There was a nationalist government which controlled much of internal Indonesia. However, that government
faced a moderate amount of internal division about how the independence movement should be waged and
about what independent Indonesia would look like.

Sources:

•

Cribb, Robert and Colin Brown (1995).

Modern Indonesia: A history since 1945

. London: Longman.

•

Ray, J.K. (1967).

Transfer of Power in Indonesia 1942-1949

. Bombay: Manaktalas.

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Iran-KDPI (conflict id 1060, dyad 80)

Conflict Summary: The Kurds are an ethnic group spread across three countries: Iran, Iraq and Turkey. In all
three, Kurdish groups have waged war against the government in an attempt to achieve greater autonomy
leading up to secession and incorporation with the neighboring Kurdish areas. In Iran, a conflict between the
Kurdish population and the government took place after World War II (see conflict id 1060, dyad 90), and
then the conflict lay dormant for almost thirty years. In 1979, however, when the Iranian Shah was
overthrown in the Islamic revolution, the Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran (KDPI) chose to take the
opportunity to try to seize control of Kurdish. They were able to do so for a short amount of time, however,
the next government rallied forces and took back control of the territory. The conflict between the KDPI and
the Iranian government ran throughout the 1980s. In the 1990s the conflict continued, however, only in
1990, 1993 and 1996 did the fighting generate more than 25 battledeaths.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The KDPI is a political and military organization. However, it has not been a legal political party throughout
the conflict.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 8,000
Rebesthigh: 10,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989, 1990 and 1993 the KDPI had 10,500 troops while in
1996 it had 8,000 troops. These estimates are in comparison to over 600,000 troops possessed by the Iranian
army.

Terrcont: no

With the exception of a brief period beginning in 1979 when the group had control of the Kurdish region of
Iran, the KDPI has not controlled territory throughout this conflict.

Newendate: 12/31/1996

Although the conflict is not officially resolved, it has not generated more than 25 battledeaths in a year since
1996.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Onwar.com

•

Minorities at Risk Profiles

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Iran-Republic of Kurdistan (conflict id 1060, dyad 90)

Conflict Summary: In the aftermath of World War II, the Kurdish region of Iran, with Soviet support,
declared independence. The Iranian government was opposed to Kurdish independence but had no hope of
defeating the Soviet Union militarily. Instead, the government pressured the Soviet Union to uphold its
agreement to fully pull out of Iran after the end of the World War, and in May 1945 under international
pressure and in the interest of achieving a favorable oil deal with Iran, the Soviets did so. By the end of the
year Kurdistan realized it could not stand up to the Iranian military and peacefully surrendered. The Kurdish
conflict in Iran lay dormant for thirty years, however, it was not completely resolved (see conflict id 1060,
dyad 80).

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Iran-Kurdistan

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The region of Kurdistan was represented by the Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran. None of the sources
identified whether this party was legal in the Iranian Republic.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Onwar.com reports that the rebels fighting for Kurdish independence had 10,000 troops. The Kurdish army
was much weaker than the Iranian national army and was only able to initially establish independence due to
Soviet support.

Dyad: Iran-Soviet Union

Rebpolwing, rebpolwinglegal: does not apply.

The Soviet Union was an external state participant in this internationalized conflict and so did not have a
political wing.

rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 60,000
rebstrength: much stronger

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives reports that the Soviet Union had 60,000 troops in their occupied portions
of Iran following World War II and before their pullout in 1946. The Iranian national army was obviously no
match for the Soviet army and could not defeat the Republic of Kurdistan militarily as long as the Soviets
were backing it.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

•

Daniel, Elton L. (2001).

The History of Iran

. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

•

Hambly, Gavin R.G. (1991). “The Pahlavi Autocracy: Muhammad Riza Shah, 1941-1979” in Peter
Avery, Gavin Hambly and Charles Melville, Ed.

The Cambridge History of Iran Volume 7: From Nadir

Shah to the Islamic Republic

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Iran-Republic of Azerbaijan (conflict id 1070, dyad 100)

Conflict Summary: Iran was divided between the allied powers during the second World War but a
commitment was made by Britain and the Soviet Union to grant Iran independence again after the war.
However, in the months following the end of the World War, two regions of Iran—Kurdistan and Azerbaijan
began clamoring for independence. The Soviets were interested in helping Azerbaijan achieve independence
for two reasons—the Tudeh (or New Democratic) Party was a left-wing party with communist leanings that
had a lot of power in Azerbaijan and the Soviets hopes that if Azerbaijan were to secede it might integrate
with the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan, thus adding to the size of the Soviet Union. On November 16, 1945,
the Republic of Azerbaijan declared open rebellion and members of the Tudeh party attacked Iranian police
in Tabriz (the provincial capital of Azerbaijan). The Iranian government clamored for the removal of Soviet
troops from Iranian soil as they had agreed, but the Soviets stalled throughout the early months of 1946 until
international pressure and oil interests convinced them to withdraw in May. In December of 1946 the Iranian
government decided to attack the secessionists regions and they quickly collapsed.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Iran-Republic of Azerbaijan

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The secessionists in Azerbaijan were primarily members of the Tudeh party who were allowed to compete in
provincial elections.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources identify the number of troops the Tudeh party in Azerbaijan controlled. However, it is
clear that without Soviet support the province was no match for the national army.

Dyad: Iran-Soviet Union

Rebpolwing, rebpolwinglegal: does not apply.

The Soviet Union was an external state participant in this internationalized conflict and so did not have a
political wing.

rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 60,000
rebstrength: much stronger

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives reports that the Soviet Union had 60,000 troops in their occupied portions
of Iran following World War II and before their pullout in 1946. The Iranian national army was obviously no
match for the Soviet army and could not defeat the Republic of Azerbaijan militarily as long as the Soviets
were backing it.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

•

Daniel, Elton L. (2001).

The History of Iran

. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. IZL (conflict id 1080)

Conflict Summary: During World War II, a growing Zionist movement based in Palestine began pushing for
the creation of a Jewish state. The large number of Jewish refugees in Europe after the holocaust led to
increased pressure on the United Kingdom to allow the creation of a state of Israel. Despite this pressure, the
UK government continued to place strict limits on Jewish immigration to Palestine. In response, a number of
underground militant organizations began waging terrorist campaigns aimed at pushing the British out of
Palestine. The largest of these organizations was Irgun Zvai Leumi, an organization led by Menahem Beggin.
In 1946, this terrorism reached their peak with incredibly high-profile attacks including the bombing of the
King David Hotel, where the colonial offices were based, which resulted in the death or injury of over 150
people. The combination of terrorist in Palestine, domestic political movements in the UK and international
pressure led the United Kingdom to turn the question of Palestine over to the United Nations in 1947,
leading to the creation of an Israeli state in May 1948.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Irvun Zvai Leumi was an organization dedicated to violent challenge of the British colonial authority in order
to promote the creation of an Israeli state, but was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 1,500
Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The

New York Times

reported on July 28, 1946 that “Irgum Zvai Leumi…numbers 4,000 to 5,000 men and

women, of whom 1,500 are engaged in ‘frontline duty.’”

Sources:

•

New York Times

•

Sachar, Howard M. (1996).

A History of Israel from the Rish of Zionism to Our Time

. Second Edition. New

York: Alfred A. Knopf.

•

Metz, Helen Chapin. Ed. (1988).

Israel: A Country Study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: France vs. Lao Issara (conflict id 1090)

Conflict Summary: In 1945, Japan captured Laos and the other Indochinese colonies from France and
declared it independent. A government was established in Laos generally referred to as the “Lao Issara”
government. Following Japan’s defeat in the summer of 1945, the French decided to re-colonize Laos. The
Lao Issara government opposed the recolonization and held onto power for almost a year. However, French
troops quickly reoccupied Laos and in 1946, overthrew the Lao Issara government which fled into exile in
Thailand. For the next seven years, the Lao Issara launched small-scale guerilla attacks into Laos which were
almost completely ineffectual. In 1953, the insurrection ended when France, giving into international
pressure, granted Laos independence and the Lao Issara became the government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Lao Issara was the former government of Laos in the brief period that it was independence in 1945-
1946. The government was overthrown by the French who reinstated their colonial rule.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Lao Issara.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the French forces present in Laos.

Newendate: 10/30/1953

Laos achieved independence in October 1953.

Source:

•

Evans, Grant (2002).

A Short History of Laos: The Land in Between

. New South Wells, Australia: Allen &

Unwin.

Conflict: Philippines vs. Huk (conflict id 1100, dyad 130)

Conflict Summary: The Huk were a group formed in the central Luzon region of Philippines in the 1940s to
challenge the Japanese occupation. When the United States took the Philippines back from Japan and set
1946 as the time of independence for the island nation, the Huk transformed into a political movement and
participated in elections. The party was defeated, however, by the liberal party, and the left-wing group
returned to central Luzon and began a guerilla insurgency. While the rebellion started out small, within a
couple of years the Huk had grown and were threatening the government. The United States, however, was
alarmed by the Communist connections of the group and began providing advanced weapons and training to
the Philippine government, and by 1954 the Huk had been largely defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Huk participated as a political party in elections in 1946. However, following their defeat in the elections
they returned to armed struggle and were subsequently banned.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: parity

Onwar.com estimates that the Huk had 50,000 troops during the war, as compared to 75,000 for the
Philippine government.

Sources:

•

Onwar.com

•

Kerkvliet, Benedict J. (1977).

The Huk Rebellion: A Study of Peasant Revolt in the Philippines

. Berkeley, CA:

University of California Press.

Conflict: Philippines vs. NPA (conflict id 1100, dyads 140 and 150)

Conflict Summary: The Philippines has faced a communist-inspired peasant insurgency for much of its
independent history. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, this insurgency was led by the Huks (see conflict id
1100, dyad 130). In the 1960s, a new guerilla organization formed, the New People’s Army (NPA), the armed
wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP). The NPA began an armed struggle in the late 1960s
that would continue for more than thirty years. At first the group was very small, but in the early 1970s it
gained in force. Soon, more than 20,000 guerillas waged war against the government and presented a major
threat to the internal security of the country. In 1972, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos responded to
the insurgency by declaring martial law, however, the NPA proved resilient. In 1986, Marcos was removed
from power, and the instability in the country and abuses brought about by martial law were the major factors
behind his ousting.

Following the removal of Marcos, new Philippine president Aquino initiated peace talks with the

rebels. Aquino’s handling of the conflict led to some clashes with the military, including at least six attempts
from 1987-1990 to remove her in a coup d’etat led by a faction of the military often referred to as Reform
Movement of the Armed Forces-Soldiers of the Filipino People (RAM-SFP).

In the early 1990s, the conflict de-escalated as international support for the NPA declined and as the

government increasingly pursued negotiations. However, the attempts at reaching a peace agreement have not
succeeded and the conflict escalated again during the late 1990s/early 2000s. The conflict was ongoing as of
the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Philippines vs. NPA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The NPA was the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Phillipines. The CPP was an outlawed political
party.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 23,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com reports that for the first twenty years of the conflict the NPA had around 20,000 troops. The
Uppsala Conflict Database gives estimates for the 1990s-2003 that are closer to around 10,000 with one year
as low as 6,000.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1969

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the conflict between the Philippines and the NPA reached 25
battledeaths by December 31, 1969.

Dyad: Philippines vs. Military Faction/RAM-SFP

Note: My research indicates these two groups are the same, even though they are treated as separate in the
Armed Conflict Database.

Rebpolwing: no

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. Forest Brothers (conflict id 1110)

Conflict Summary: On August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed the Molotov-
Ribbentrop Pact which carved up Europe into German and Soviet zones. The Soviet Union was given
control over the Baltics and in 1940 they invaded and took control of the independent states of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania. Armed resistance to the Soviet occupation soon formed in all of these countries, but
was halted when in 1941 Germany broke its pact with the Soviets and invaded and took control of the Baltic
states. In 1944, the Soviet Union regained control of these states and the resistance began again. In Estonia,
the groups opposed to the Soviet occupation were referred to as the “Forest Brothers” and they comprised
people who literally went into the forests to conduct guerilla warfare aimed at ending the Soviet occupation.
A brutual strategy of deportation to Siberia depleted the Forest Brothers and, although the war continued on
a low level until 1954, the conflict was effectively over in 1948.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Forest Brothers were a group of guerilla fighters opposed to the Soviet occupation and did not represent
a political organization.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Laar (2001) writes there were an estimated 30,000-40,000 Forest Brothers in Estonia. This category included
everyone who went into the forest to flee Soviet occupation; it is not clear what percentage of this number
actively battled the occupation.

Source:

•

Laar, Matt (2001). “The Armed Resistance Movement in Estonia from 1944 to 1956.” In Arvydas
Anusauskas, Ed.,

The Anti-Soviet Resistance in the Baltic States

. Akreta, Lithuania: Genocide and

Resistance Research Centre of Lithuania.

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. Latvian partisans (conflict id 1120)

Conflict Summary: On August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed the Molotov-
Ribbentrop Pact which carved up Europe into German and Soviet zones. The Soviet Union was given
control over the Baltics and in 1940 they invaded and took control of the independent states of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania. Armed resistance to the Soviet occupation soon formed in all of these countries, but
was halted when in 1941 Germany broke its pact with the Soviets and invaded and took control of the Baltic
states. In 1944, the Soviet Union regained control of these states and the resistance began again. In Latvia, the
resistance was led by several different “partisan unions,” the main ones of which were the Association of the
Latvian Fatherland Guards (LTSPA) and the Latvian National Partisan Association (LNPA). These groups
conducted guerilla warfare against the Soviet occupation. However, a harsh Soviet policy of mass
deportations (over 40,000 Latvians were deported to Siberia) dried up information and supply lines for the
partisans and the rebellion was defeated.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Soviet Union vs. LTSPA

Rebpolwing: no

The LTSPA was a military organization dedicated to removing the Soviet occupation and not a political
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Strods (2001) estimates that in Latvia there were 20,000 people who conducted armed resistance against the
Soviets. It is not clear how many of these resisters were in LTSPA but it was one of the two largest groups.

Dyad: Soviet Union vs. LNPA

Rebpolwing: no

The LNPA was a military organization dedicated to removing the Soviet occupation and not a political
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Strods (2001) estimates that in Latvia there were 20,000 people who conducted armed resistance against the
Soviets. It is not clear how many of these resisters were in LNPA but it was one of the two largest groups.

Source:

•

Strods, Heinrihs (2001). “The Latvian Partisan War between 1944 and 1956.” In Arvydas
Anusauskas, Ed.,

The Anti-Soviet Resistance in the Baltic States

. Akreta, Lithuania: Genocide and

Resistance Research Centre of Lithuania.

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. Lithuanian Partisans (conflict id 1130)

Conflict Summary: On August 23, 1939, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany signed the Molotov-
Ribbentrop Pact which carved up Europe into German and Soviet zones. The Soviet Union was given
control over the Baltics and in 1940 they invaded and took control of the independent states of Estonia,
Latvia and Lithuania. Armed resistance to the Soviet occupation soon formed in all of these countries, but
was halted when in 1941 Germany broke its pact with the Soviets and invaded and took control of the Baltic
states. In 1944, the Soviet Union regained control of these states and the resistance began again. In Lithuania,
like in its Baltic neighbors, this resistance was led by partisan groups that took to the forest and engaged in
guerilla warfare. One of the major groups involved in the resistancee was the United Democratic Resistance
Movement (BDPS). Repressive Soviet tactics of executions, torture and massive deportations led to the
demise of the partisan movement.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The BDPS was a militant organization dedicated to removing the Soviet occupation and did not represent a
political organization.

Rebestimate: 25,000
Rebestlow: 20,000
Rebesthigh: 30,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com estimates that between 20,000 and 30,000 partisans died during the war. It is not clear what
percentage of the overall number this was.

Sources:

•

Onwar.com

•

Gaskaite-Zemaitiene, Nijole (2001). “The Partisan War in Lithuania from 1944 to 1953.” In Arvydas
Anusauskas, Ed.,

The Anti-Soviet Resistance in the Baltic States

. Akreta, Lithuania: Genocide and

Resistance Research Centre of Lithuania.

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. UPA (conflict id 1140)

Conflict Summary: The Ukrainian people were divided among a number of stats in the period between the
two World Wars. The eastern part of Ukraine was in the Soviet zone of control while the Western part of the
country was divided between Poland, Romania and Czechoslovakia. During World War II, the Ukraine was
first split between Germany and the Soviet Union, then in 1941 it was entirely taken over by Nazi Germany
and in 1944, the whole territory was reconquered by the Soviet Union. Nationalist groups formed across the
Ukraine but were most prominent in Western Ukraine where there was not a history of Soviet control. The
man “partisan” or nationalist group to form in Western Ukraine was the Ukraine Partisan Army (UPA),
which battled both the Nazi and the Soviet occupation. The UPA achieved the most military success in its
battles with the Soviets in the early years of the occupation, 1944-1946, while the Soviet army was still heavily
involved in Germany. However, with the end of World War II, Stalin was able to focus more attention on the
rebellious province and the UPA was quickly defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The UPA was affiliated with the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) a political party dedicated to
promoting independence for the Ukraine.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Subtelny (2000) writes that the best estimates are that the UPA had between 30,000 and 40,000 partisans at its
peak.

Source:

•

Subtelny, Orest (2000).

Ukraine: A History

. Third Edition. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Conflict: France vs. Viet Minh (conflict id 1170)

Conflict Summary: Vietnam was a French colony leading up to World War II when it was occupied by the
Japanese. Prior to World War II, Vietnam already had a significant communist apparatus, the Indochina
Communist Party (ICP) that campaigned on behalf of the colony’s large peasant population. During World
War II, the ICP, led by Ho Chi Minh, switched their strategy and decided that national independence had to
come before social revolution. To accomplish this goal, the group softened its economic and social demands
and allied with other nationalist organizations. In the aftermath of World War II, the ICP and its affiliated
Viet Nam Doc Lap Dong Minh Hoi (hereafter referred to as Viet Minh) took advantage of the power
vacuum in the region to establish a provincial government in Hanoi and declare an independent Democratic
Republic of Vietnam. The French government did not recognize the independence of Vietnam and in 1946 a
war broke out between the Viet Minh and French forces. At first, the Viet Minh were completely outmatched
by the superior firepower and fighting capacity of the French and they lost most of the territory they had
controlled. However, the Viet Minh was able to use its large number of soldiers (as many as 250,000) and
guerilla warfare tactics to turn the war to its advantage and by the late 1940s the Viet Minh was in a strong
position. The war continued until 1954 when the French acceded control of North Vietnam to the Viet Minh
and a government was established in Hanoi. The North Vietnamese government quickly turned its attention
to supporting communist groups in South Vietnam which had also achieved independence and was
supported by the United States (see conflict id 1520).

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Viet Minh was directly affiliated with the Indochinese Communist Party, which was made illegal prior to
World War II.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 250,000
Rebstrength: parity

Vietnam: A Country Study

reports that by late 1948 the Viet Minh had 250,000 guerillas.

Newendate: 5/7/1954

On May 7, 1954, the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu surrendered, which marked the end of the last major
battle of the war. The next day, peace negotiations began which led to French recognition of the
independence of North Vietnam.

Source:

•

Cima, Ronald J. Ed. (1987).

Vietnam: A Country Study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: China vs. Taiwanese Insurgents (conflict id 1180)

Conflict Summary: Taiwan was reunified with China in 1948 following World War II. However, there was a
high degree of dissatisfaction among Taiwanese with the policies pursued by the Chinese administration. In
1947, an armed uprising broke out after two Taiwanese cigarette vendors were killed by Chinese police
officers. Subsequent rioting and a very harsh government crackdown led to over a thousand deaths. While the
government accused the Taiwanese insurgents of having ties to the communists fighting for control of China
(see conflict id 1030), it appears that the conflict was more over Chinese economic and political policies
relating to Taiwan. The Taiwanese insurgents proved much too weak to challenge the Chinese government
and by the end of March 1947 the conflict had ended.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The leadership of the insurgents was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of people participating in the insurgency.
However, it is clear that the insurgents were no match for the Chinese army.

Newendate: 3/21/1947

In July 1947, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that “On March 21 it was reported that the
disorders had been quelled, all major centres being in the Government’s hands; air, sea, and telegraph
communications with the Chinese mainland were reopened on March 22.”

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Hyderabad vs. CPI (conflict id 1190)

Conflict Summary: When India became independent from Great Britain in 1947, most of the independent
“princely states” within it agreed to join the state. However, two did not, one of which was Hyderabad, a state
with a population that was 80% Hindu that was ruled by a Muslim sultanate. In 1947, the sultan of
Hyderabad and the government of India signed a “standstill” agreement that left the status of the state
undetermined for one year. During that period, however, the Communist Party of India (CIP) waged a war
against the government of Hyderabad aimed at forcing the state to join with the Indian Union. The CPI
troops were not able to accomplish much, however. In September 1948, the Indian army invaded Hyderabad
and quickly defeated the government and the region became party of India.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Communist Party of India was a political movement within India. However, in Hyderabad it was merely
an insurgent force aimed at forcing the government to join with the Indian union.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Communist
Party of India. However, the group was clearly weaker than the forces possessed by the Hyderabad army.

Newendate: 9/17/1948

On September 13, 1948 the Indian army invaded Hyderabad and within four days resistance had been
crushed. This ended Hyderabad’s existence as an independent state and therefore there was no longer a civil
war within Hyderabad.

Sources:

•

New York Times

•

Wolpert, Stanley (2000).

A New History of India

. Sixth Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Conflict: France vs. Madagascar Nationalists (conflict id 1210)

Conflict Summary: Madagascar was a colony in the French empire. After World War II, when many
Madagascar soldiers who had fought on the side of the French in World War II, retured home, nationalist
sentiments in the colony were high. In 1946, Madagascar was upgraded to the status of a French overseases
territory, which gave greater (although still small) political power to the Malyasians. Malaysians were given
three seats in the government, and in elections in 1946 the Democratic Movement for the Malagasy
Renovation (MDRM), a political party calling for independence from France, won all three seats. The group
began organizing guerillas and on March 29, 1947, launched an insurrection against the French army stationed
there. The MDRM knew that it could not possibly match forces with the entire French army, however,
France had a relatively small force deployed the island. Additionally, the MDRM hoped to receive support
from the United States, which had taken an anti-colonial position in the United Nations. U.S. support did not
come, and although the MDRM guerillas were able to take control of about 1/3 of the Madagascar
countryside, they were never able to take control of any important strategic locations and by the end of 1948,
they were soundly defeated. In the midst of the conflict, the political party was outlawed, and Madagascar
remained a French colony for 10 years until it became an autonomous state in the French Union in 1958.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

When the conflict began, the MDRM was the only Madagascaran political party represented in the
government.

Rebestimate: 5,500
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com reports that in the aftermath of the conflict, 5,000-6,000 people in Madagascar were convicted of
participating in the rebellion in some fashion. It is not clear how many of these people actually participated or
what fraction of the participants were tried.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Rural Madagascar
Effterrcont: moderate

Brown (1995) writes that by the end of 2947, the MDRM had managed to take control of about 1/3 of the
countryside in Madagascar but had not been able to control any small towns.

Sources:

•

Brown, Mervyn (1995).

A History of Madagascar

. Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers.

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Paraguay-Military Faction of 1954 (conflict id 1220, dyad 240)

Case summary: An internal coup d’etat removed the current president, Cháves, who was eventually replaced
by General Alfredo Stroessner who would rule Paraguay for 34 years. The coup d’etat emerged out of
disputes between factions within the ruling Colorado party and broke out on May 3, 1954, when General
Stroessner tried to take control of a military base and were arrested by forces loyal to the president. Fighting
occurred the next two days in Asunción and on May 5, Stroessner prevailed and Cháves was deposed.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the coup d’etat emerged out of disputes within the ruling party, it was the military that inserted
itself into politics and replaced the existing government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources utilized had any information on the number of troops that supported the opposition or
the government. However, it is clear that with the bulk of the military behind the General, his was the
stronger fighting force.

Sources:

•

Lewis, Paul H. (1991). “Paraguay since 1930.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.,

The Cambridge History of Latin

America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Paraguay vs. Military Faction of 1989 (conflict id 1220, dyad 240)

Conflict Summary: General Alfredo Stroessner, who took power in a military coup in 1954, stayed in power
in Paraguay by winning 8 consecutive Presidential elections. These elections, however, including one in
February 1988, were widely believed to be characterized by fraud. In the late 1980s, a split emerged in the
rulling Colombo Party, with a group of “militants” led by Stroesser who wanted to continue one-man rule,
and a group of ‘traditionalists” who sought to gradually make the country more democratic. One of the
leading traditionalists was the second in command of the armed forces General Andres Rodriguez. Rodriguez
led a coup d’etat on February 3, 1989 and took power. The coup was very bloody, with conflict producing as
many as 300 battledeaths.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

General Andres Rodriguez was an elite member of the same political party, the Colombo Party, that President
Stroesser led. They belonged to separate factions, however.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the elite army division led by General Rodriguez had 4,000
troops and that there were 12,000 other troops in Paraguay. However, the database reports that over the
course of the conflict troops from other divisions joined Rodriguez.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

Conflict: Paraguay-Opposition Coalition (conflict id 1220, dyad 250)

Conflict Summary: This civil war in Paraguay occurred between the government and members of an
opposition coalition represented three different parties—the Communist, Liberal, and feberista party. The
feberists had been represented in a coalition government but in response to violence against their supporters
by one faction of the Colorado party, they resigned in protest on January 11, 1947. The government
responded by arresting leaders of the three major opposition parties and sending them out of the country.
There was little violence until March when members of the feberista party seized the police station in
Asuncion. They were kicked out within a matter of hours, but the next day an infantry division in Concepcion
revolted and supported the rebels. Over the next few days several army units in eastern Paraguay joined the
rebellion. The government quickly rallied support from a range of sources—peasants loyal to the Colorado
party, foreign aid from Argentina and a militant wing of the Colorado party. On July 31 the army attacked
Concepcion and were successful, however, they learned upon entry that the rebels had fled the night before
and were making their way to Asunción on river boats. They reached the city and fierce fighting continued,
and by August 19 the rebels had been defeated and the government retained power.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The feberista party was a legal political organization that had participated in a coalition government prior to
the civil war. The Communist party, however, was not legal.

Rebestimate: 3,300
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 4,500
Rebstrength: weaker

No source identified an estimate of the size of the rebel forces. However, Keesing’s Contemporary Archives
reports that 1,650 rebels were killed in the unsuccessful attempt to take Asunción. I have doubled that
number for the estimate, assuming that no more than half of the rebels were killed and have included
numbers for the low and high estimate on either end of that. It is clear, however, that the rebel strength
throughout the civil war was less than that of the Paraguayan army that remained loyal to the government.

Sources:

•

Lewis, Paul H. (1991). “Paraguay since 1930.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.,

The Cambridge History of Latin

America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Burma vs. Karen Nationalist Groups (conflict id 1230)

Conflict Summary: The Karen are a minority population in Myanmar (formerly Burma) that is concentrated
in the southeastern part of the country along the border with Thailand. The Karen region was administered as
part of Burma during the British colonial period and prior to independence Karen leaders asked that the
region become a separate state upon independence. That request was denied by the British and conflict over
the status of the region began almost immediately after independence. In 1949, the Karen National Union
(KNU) and their armed wing the Karen National Defense Organization (KNDO) started an armed campaign
and wrested control of large areas of the Karen region away from the Burmese government. However, the
group overextended itself and by 1950, the Burmese army had regained control of some of the territory. Since
then, the KNU has waged a more than fifty year guerilla campaign against the Burmese government for
independence.

Notes on Coding

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first period covers the first year of the conflict (1949) when
the conflict was the most intense and when the KNU achieved the greatest military success. The second
period covers the next fifty-five years of the conflict as the KNU has waged a guerilla warfare campaign
against the Burmese/Myanmar government.

Period 1: 1949

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The KNU was a political organization and had a military wing, the Karen National Defense Organization
(KNDO). However, the group was not a legal political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

According to Fredholm (1993, p. 103), the KNU was able to mobilize about 10,000 fighters in the early
period of the conflict.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

Throughout the conflict, the KNU has been the only Burmese insurgent group that has not been beset by
fractionalization.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: much of Karen region
Effterrcont: moderate

In its initial advance, the KNU was able to gain control of large parts of the Karen region.

Period 2: 1950-Ongoing

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The KNU is a political organization and had a military wing, the KNDO. However, the group is not a legal
political party.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the KNU: In 1989:
3,000-8,000; in 1990: 4,000-8,000; in 1991: 5,000-20,000; in 1992: 4,000-6,000; in 1995: 3,500-4,000; in 1997:
2,000-4,000; in 1998: 4,000; in 1999: 4,000-15,000; in 2000: 4,000-20,000; in 2001: 4,000; in 2002: 2,000-7,000;
in 2003: 4,000. These estimates are in comparison to between 200,000 and 400,000 troops for the Burmese
army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

Throughout the conflict, the KNU has been the only Burmese insurgent group that has not been beset by
fractionalization.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of the Karen Region and Shan State
Effterrcont: moderate

After their initial advance, the KNU was pushed back by the Burmese army. However, throughout the
conflict they have controlled parts of the Karen region and also have at times established control over parts
of Shan state.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: Burma vs. ABSDF (conflict id 1240, dyad 280)

Conflict Summary: The government of Myanmar (formerly Burma) has experienced conflict throughout its
independent history, most of it driven by minority ethnic groups seeking greater autonomy from the state.
However, the Burmese authoritarian government has also faced challenge from groups seeking to overthrow
it and replace it with a different form of government. Throughout the Cold War, the Burmese Communist
Party and a set of other leftist organizations challenged the government militarily (see conflict id 1240, dyad
290). In the late 1980s, as the economy of Burma was in recession a growing number of student groups and
other organizations organized protests, many of which turned violent. These groups organized an insurgent
movement, the All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF) in the early 1990s and began challenging the
government. The organization was highly dependent on support from the ethnic insurgent groups, however,
and was unable to accomplish much militarily. By the end of 1992, although there was still an organization it
had lost most of its fighting capacity because many of its members had joined ethnic insurgent groups
instead.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The ABSDF was formed as a political organization to oppose the military government.

Rebestimate: 2,250
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the ABSDF: In
1990, 500-2,570; in 1991: 4,000; in 1992: 1,400-2,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 200,000
troops for the Burmese army.

Newstartdate: 3/20/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths on March 20, 1990.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: Burma vs. Communist Party of Burma and other leftist organizations (conflict id 1240, dyad 290).

Conflict Summary: Burma, like many other southeast Asian countries, faced a communist insurgency that
predated its independence in 1948. The insurgency was led primarily by the Communist Party of Burma
(CPB), which was split into two factions, the Red Flag movement, a Marxist-Leninist organization that was
more closely allied with the Soviet Union, and the White Flag movement, a Maoist faction that received
support from the Chinese Communist Party. The White Flag movement became the dominant faction in the
CPB and was the most influential leftist group in Burma. However, the Red Flag and several other leftist
groups also waged armed conflict against the Burmese government, albeit with much less success.

In 1947 and 1948, the CPB seized major areas of territory across Burma. The government was on the

defensive facing a robust leftist rebellion as well as several ethnic insurgencies. In 1948 the conflict shifted in
the government’s favor, however, and by the late 1940s the CPB was losing territory. In the 1950s the
government continued to score major successes against both the CPB (which consisted of the White Flag
movement) and the Red Flag movement, and on July 31, 1958, a government amnesty robbed the
organizations of many of their members. The CPB persisted, however, and beginning in 1959 it began to
cooperate more heavily with the ethnic insurgents in the country. Meanwhile, the Red Flag movement was
never able to completely recover, and it split into two new organizations both of which confined themselves
to a small region of Burma and fought on behalf of the Arakan ethnic group (see conflict id 1250).

Throughout the 1960s the CPB grew in strength again and was able to gain a good amount of

territory. A new counter-insurgency strategy in 1968, however, put the CPB on the defensive and in the 1970s
the CPB suffered several crushing defeats. The group was able to reorganize again in the 1980s and achieve
some tactical success, however, by the end of the 1980s the combination of neative relations with the ethnic
insurgents and the emergence of a new, pro-democracy political movement (see conflict id 1240, dyad 280)
led the CPB to fractionalize and to disappear as a noticeable insurgent group.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Government vs. CPB

This conflict is best described in three periods. The first covers the phase of the conflict from 1948 to 1953
when the CPB was at its strongest militarily and was a legal political party. The second covers the period from
1953 to 1958 when the group was relatively strong but no longer legal. The third covers the remaining 30
years of the conflict.

Period 1: 1948-1953

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Communist Party of Burma was a political and military organization. While all the ethnic insurgent
groups were declared illegal after their formation, the government left the BCP legal for five years to try to
encourage negotiations and to de-escalate the armed struggle.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that in the early years of the conflict, the CPB was estimated to have 4,000 troops
spread across the country.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Much of Burma
Effterrcont: moderate

Fredholm (1993) writes that in early 1948 “vast areas (of Burma) had already fallen to the communist
insurgents” (p. 210).

Period 2: 1953-1958

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Burma was a political and military organization. It was declared illegal in October
1953.

Rebestimate: 4,500
Rebestlow: 4,000
Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that the People’s of Burma (PA) the armed wing of the CPB, had 4,000 to 5,000
troops.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Burma
Effterrcont: moderate

The CPB, as mentioned above, seized large areas of Burma in the first year of the conflict. However, over the
period leading up to 1958 much of that territory was taken back by the government.

Period 3: 1958-1988

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Part of Burma was a political and military organization. It was declared illegal in October
1953.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that in 1968, the north-east command of the Communist Party of Burma had 20,000
armed troops.

Dyad: Burma vs. Red Flag Movement

This conflict is best described in two periods, one covering 1948-1953 when the CPB (including the Red Flag
movement) was a legal political party and the next covering the remaining five years of the conflict.

Period 1: 1948-1953

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Red Flag movement was a faction of the Communist Party of Burma and so was a legal political entity.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that the Red Flag movement probably never had more than 3,000 troops.

Period 2: 1953-1958

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Red Flag movement was a faction of the Communist Party of Burma. The CPB was made illegal in
October 1953.

Rebestimate: 1,875
Rebestlow: 750
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that the Red Flag movement probably never had more than 3,000 troops and that the
best estimates are that it had around 750 troops in 1958.

Newendate: 7/31/1958

On July 31, 1958, the Burmese government offered an amnesty to insurgents and a number of the members
of the Red Flag movement accepted.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: Burma vs. Arakan Insurgents (conflict id 1250)

Conflict Summary: Myanmar (formerly Burma) is a country with a dominant majority population and several
minority populations. One such minority group is the Arakan, whose population is divided into two ethnic
groups based on religion—the Rakhine are Buddhist while the Rohingya are Muslims. The Rakhine and
Rohingya have fought intercommuncal conflicts for years and, since independence, the Burmese government
has generally sided with the Rakhine. This favoritism has led to conflict between the government and
Rohingya groups. The Arakan region has seen conflict between the government and a large number of
insurgent groups, many of whom were very small and were completely unable to accomplish anything
militarily. However, a few groups have been larger and more effective in the conflict.

The first main Arakan insurgent group was the Arakan People’s Liberation Party (APLP) which

began fighting the government upon independence in 1948 and continued fighting until they accepted a
government amnesty in 1958. In 1962, another larger insurgent group emerged in the Communist Party of
Arakan (CPA). The CPA was a successor to the Communist Party of Burma Red Flag Movement, one of
many leftist groups which had battled the government (see conflict id 1240, dyad 290). In the 1960s and
1970s, the CPA continued to battle the government on behalf of both Arakan and leftist causes, but the
group remained small and was not very militarily effective.

The 1980s saw conflict between the government and a series of Arakan insurgents but no dominant

group emerged. In the 1990s, two main groups arose to challenge the government, the Arakan Rohingya
Islamic Front (ARIF) and the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation (RSO) being the most prominent. As of the
end of 2003, conflict between the government and the Arakan continued at a low level of intensity.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Burma vs. APLP

Rebpolwing: no

The APLP was an insurgent force and was not a political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,100
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that “the Arakan People’s Liberation Party (APLP), led by U Seinda, had more than a
thousand armed troops” (p. 174).

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The APLP did have a central command. However, all of the Arakan insurgent groups were beset by
fractionalization.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1948

The conflict between the government and the APLP started sometime in 1948.

Newendate: 7/31/1958

On July 31, 1958, the government offered amnesty to many Burmese insurgent groups, the APLP was one of
those who accepted.

Dyad: Burma vs. CPA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Arakan was the successor to the left-wing red flat movement and was both a
political and a military organization. The CPA was not legal.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that the CPA had three-hundred guerilla soldiers in the 1960s and 1970s.

Newstartdate: 3/11/1962

The Communist Party of Arakan was formed on March 11, 1962.

Newendate: 12/31/1980

The CPA suffered serious damage at the hands of the government in the late 1970s. In 1980, the group had
to withdraw out of Arakan territory and go further north and the group was not military effective again after
that.

Dyad: Burma vs. RSO

Rebpolwing: no

The RSO was an insurgent force and does not appear to have been affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1991 and 1992 the RSO had 6,000 troops and in 1994 it had
between 300 and 5,000 troops. These estimates are in comparison to over 200,000 troops possessed by the
Burmese army.

Newstartdate: 12/29/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the RSO first reached
25 battledeaths on December 29, 1991.

Newendate: 12/31/1994

The conflict between the government and the RSO, while not officially resolved, has not reached 25
battledeaths in a single year since 1994.

Dyad: Burma vs. ARIF

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The ARIF is affiliated with the Democratic Alliance of Burma, an umbrella political organization. The
Democratic Alliance of Burma is not legal.

Rebestimate: 300
Rebestlow: 100
Rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the ARIF had between 100 and 500 troops in 1991.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the ARIF had reached
25 battledeaths by December 31, 1991.

Newendate: 12/31/1992

While the conflict between the government and the ARIF is not officially resolved, it has not reached 25
battledeaths in a year since 1992.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: Burma vs. Mon Insurgents (conflict id 1260)

Conflict Summary: Myanmar (formerly Burma) is a country with a dominant majority population and a
number of minority groups that were incorporated into Burma during British colonialism. One minority
ethnic group are the Mon, who reside primarily in the southeastern part of the country. When Burma
achieved independence in 1948, it immediately faced an insurrection from Karen insurgents fighting for
secession (see conflict id 1230). Some Mon political groups, such as the Mon National Defense Organization,
fought together with the Karen insurgents. Other groups, such as the Mon People’s Front (MPF), which also
took up armed struggle against the government in 1948, fought against the government to try to gain greater
political autonomy for the Mon. The MPF achieved initial success, however, it was unable to mobilize a
significant fighting force and by the 1950s was on the defensive. In 1958, the government offered to create a
Mon state within Burma and provided an amnesty to Mon insurgents. The MPF stopped fighting and over a
thousand of their fighters surrendered under the amnesty.

Not all Mon political leaders were satisfied with the government’s offer, however, and a new

insurgent group, the New Mon State Party (NMSP) was formed. The group dedicated itself to armed struggle,
however, the group was very small and aside from some initial military success in 1958 the first more than ten
years of the conflict were pretty quiet. By the early 1970s, however, the NMSP had mobilized over a thousand
troops and attempted to coordinate with other Burmese insurgent groups and in the 1980s the conflict
escalated again. In the 1990s, the government increased its military offensive and international pressure on
the NMSP to end the armed struggle led to the opening of negotiations in 1993. In 1995, the NMSP signed a
cease-fire with the government.

The conflict in Mon state did not entirely end with the signing of the ceasefire as a faction of the

NMSP broke off and became the Beik Mon Army (BMA). The BMA conflict did not last long, however, and
by 1997, the last main insurgent group in Mon state had stopped fighting.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Government vs. MPF

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The MPF was a political and military organization dedicated to promoting Mon political interests. It, like
other Burmese insurgent groups, was illegal.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,111
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993) reports that at the time the MPF stopped fighting in 1953, it had 1,111 troops (p. 132).

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of southeastern Burma (later Mon state)
Effterrcont: low

Fredholm (1993) writes that the MPF controlled parts of the Mon region of Burma in 1948 but that over the
next few years “the insurgent-controlled areas were gradually reduced in size or even completely eliminated”
(p. 132).

Newendate: 7/31/1958

The Burmese government offered amnesty on July 31, 1958, and almost all fo the MPF soldiers accepted it.

Dyad: Government vs. NMSP

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first covers the initial period of the struggle from 1958 to
1970 when the group was very small and military ineffectual. The second covers the period from 1971 to
1990 when the group had grown and represented more of a fighting force.

Period 1: 1958-1970

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The NMSP was a political and military organization. However, like other Burmese insurgent groups, it was
not a legal political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 100
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993) writes that “In 1963, the NMSP had a hundred armed troops” (p. 133).

Terrcont: no

In this period, the NMSP waged their struggle primarily based in the jungle.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1958

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the NMSP had reached
25 battledeaths by December 31, 1958.

Period 2: 1971-1990

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The NMSP was a political and military organization. However, like other Burmese insurgent groups, it was
not a legal political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the NMSP had 3,000 troops in 1990. This estimate was in
comparison to over 200,000 troops for the Burmese government.

Newendate: 12/31/1990

Although the government and NMSP did not sign a ceasefire until 1995, the conflict did not again reach 25
battledeaths in a year after 1990.

Dyad: Government vs. BMA

Rebpolwing: no

The BMA was a breakaway faction from the NMSP and did not represent a separate faction.

Conflict: Costa Rica vs. National Liberation Army (conflict id 1270)

Conflict Summary: In March 1948, the Costa Rican government annulled Presidential elections in which the
opposition candidate, Senor Otilio Ulate, had defeated the government-sponsored candidate, Dr. Rafael
Calderon Guardia. Civil war soon followed. A Colonel in the army, José Figueras, became the head of a
National Liberation Army which vowed to overthrow the government in support of Ulate. On March 13,
1948, the National Liberation Army seized control of the town of San Isidro, and by the end of March had
taken control of nearly all of southern Costa Rica. In April, negotiations were held between the government
and the insurgents but they were unsuccessful and on April 24, the government had fled and the National
Liberation Army had taken power.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The National Liberation Army was fighting on behalf of Senor Otilio Ulate, who had won elections which
had been annulled by the government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

It is not clear what percentage of the army joined the National Liberation Army. However, the insurgent
forces clearly overwhelmed the government supporters.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: India vs. Communist Organizations (conflict id 1290)

Conflict Summary: For large periods of its independent history, India has faced an armed challenge from
organizations with a communist ideology. The first of these groups, the Communist Party of India (CPI),
formed during the British colonial rule. In 1948-1951, the CPI worked with trade unions and other
organizations to encourage strikes and protests against the ruling India Congress Party. Some of these strikes
turned violent and had to be suppressed militarily by the government. Despite this initial conflict, the CPI
was considerably more passive than similar organizations in other Asian countries.

In the late 1960s, another communist uprising broke out against the government, led by the

Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M), which had split off from the CPI. The CPI-M quickly splintered
as well, and the main group involved in the fighting in the 1960s was the “Naxalites” a group affiliated with
the Communist Party of India Marxist-Leninist (CPI M-L) that fought on behalf of peasants and the lower
castes. The Indian government responded to the insurgency with violent repression and by 1973 armed
conflict had largely ceased. For the next fifteen years various communist organizations persisted in India as
many of these above organizations continued to splinter. However, the situation between the government
and these groups was relatively peaceful.

In 1989, a new communist insurgency broke out against the government, led primarily by two

groups, the Maoist Communist Centre (MCC) and the People’s War Group (PWG). Both groups were Maoist
organizations committed to establish a “People’s Government” through waging “People’s War.” Although
the conflict between the government and these groups never reached a high level of intensity in a single year,
it has persisted for more than 14 years and was still ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: India vs. CPI

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Communist Party of India was a political organization founded during the colonial period. It was a legal
political party, however, the government was opposed to many of its tactics.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the CPI in this
period. However, it is clear that the group was much weaker than the Indian army and it was able to persist in
the armed struggle only through organizing strikes and other protests.

Dyad: India vs. CPI-M/Naxalites

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of India-Marxist was a party which split off from the dominant CPI. It was not a legal
political party.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in April 1971 that there were 10,000 to 20,000 Naxalites
operating in West Bengal, one of their main bases of operations. It is not clear what percentage of the overall
force of Naxalites in the country this force represented.

Dyad: India vs. MCC

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The MCC is a political organization dedicated to overthrowing the existing government and establishing a
“people’s government.” However, the group is not a legal political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that from 1992 to 2003, the MCC had approximately 1,000 troops.
This estimate is in comparison to up to 2 million troops for the Indian army.

Terrcont: no

The MCC has acted primarily as a terrorist organization and does not control any territory.

Dyad: India vs. Naxalites/PWG

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The PWG is a political organization dedicated to overthrowing the existing government and establishing a
“people’s government.” However, the group is not a legal political organization.

Rebestimate: 2,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 6,100
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the PWG: In 1990,
1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994: 1,000; in 1995, 1996 and 1997: no estimate; in 1998: 1,000-5,000; in 1999 and
2000: no information; in 2001 and 2002: 1,100-6,100; in 2003: 1,000. These estimates are in comparison to up
to 2 million troops for the Indian army.

Terrcont: no

The PWG has acted primarily as a terrorist organization and does not control any territory.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Wolpert, Stanley (2000).

A New History of India

Sixth Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Conflict: United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand vs. Communist Party of Malaya (conflict id 1310)

Conflict Summary: Malyasia, a British colony, was occupied by the Japanese during World War II. During
that period, the Communist Party of Malaya was one of the major groups resisting Japanese occupation,
which increased its support among the population immensely. In the aftermath of World War II, Malaysia
returned to British rule, although the British government set a roadmap toward independence. The first three
years after World War II saw a period of cooperation among Malaysia political parties and with the British
authority. However, in 1948, the Communist Party of Malaya launched an insurrection aimed at removing the
British authority and ending the federation that was present in Malaysia. The Communist Party was not able
to mobilize much popular support for two main reasons. First, the economy in Malaysia had improved greatly
over the three years following the war and so the working class in Malyasia was not as unhappy as it had been
earlier. Second, the Communist Party was almost entirely Chinese, a minority who represent only about 12%
of the Malaysian population, and so it gained little support from the majority Malay population. Despite this
lack of popular support, the Communist Party was able to wage a guerilla insurgency that continued even
after Malaya gained independence from Britain in 1957. The conflict after 1957 is treated as a separate
conflict, however, because the “government” actor changed from the British colonial authority to the
Malaysian government (see conflict id 1640)

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Malaya was a political party in Malaysia. It had been legal prior to the outbreak of
conflict, but emergency legislation in 1948 banned the party (Turnbull, 1989).

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Communist
Party of Malaya. However, although the British authority did not have many troops in Malaysia in 1948, they
strengthened their force over the course of the conflict and significantly overpowered the Communist forces.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of rural Malaysia
Effterrcont: low

The Communist Party of Malaysia waged a guerilla campaign in the Malaysian countryside. In response, the
British colonial authority relocated many rural occupants into a set of “new villages” which had been created.

Sources:

•

Turnbull, C. Mary (1989).

A History of Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei

. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: South Korea vs. Leftist Insurgents (conflict id 1320)

Conflict Summary: Korea, which was occupied by Japan during World War II, was divided into Soviet and
United States zones of occupation after the war, with the 38

parallel as the dividing line. In 1948, two

Korean states became independent, the communist Democratic People’s Republic of Korean (commonly
referred to as North Korea) and the Republic of Korea (commonly referred to as South Korea). The
government of North Korea upon independence had visions of a unified Korea under communist control. In
1948, they began supporting left-wing guerilla organizations such as the communist South Korean Worker’s
Party in an attempt to overthrow the South Korean government. Over the next two years thousands of South
Korean guerillas received training in North Korea. By 1950 the South Korean army, receiving heavy support
from the United States, had largely defeated the communist insurgents and the government in North Korea
realized that attempting to wage a proxy war through South Korean communists was not viable. North Korea
switched strategy and attacked South Korea directly, leading to the Korean War.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The South Korean Worker’s Party was a communist political party in South Korea that was not legal.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Global Security.org estimates that as many as 5,000 South Korean guerillas trained in North Korea and were
then sent back to their home country.

Source:

•

Global Security.org

Conflict: Yemen (North) vs. National Democratic Front (conflict id 1330, dyad 390)

Conflict Summary: The Yemen Arab Republic (commonly referred to as North Yemen) experienced much
conflict throughout its independent history, both internally and with its neighbor the People’s Democratic
Republic of Yemen (commonly referred to as South Yemen). In the early 1980s, the country experienced a
brief civil war when a group of disaffected politicians united to form the National Democratic Front (NDF)
and launched an attack against the government. The NDF was aided by South Yemen, and was able to
establish bases in the southern part of Northern Yemen. However, the group was not strong militarily and by
the end of 1982 it had been soundly defeated by the North Yemen army and had been driven into exile in
South Yemen.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The NDF was an alliance of politicians, some of whom participated in a government of national unity.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the NDF.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the North Yemen army.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Dresch, Paul (2000).

A History of Modern Yemen

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Conflict: Yemen (North) vs. Opposition Coalition (conflict id 1330, dyad 400)

Conflict Summary: A brief civil war broke out in Yemen in the winter of 1948 after the leader of the country,
Imam Yahya, was assassinated along with his chief advisor and three of his sons on February 18. Immediately
following the assassination Abdullah ibn-Ahmed el-Wazir, the Imam’s former chief advisor, announced that
he was the new imam and created a new government. However, in Hajja in northwest Yemen, the eldest son
of Imam Yahya, Emir Seif el-Islam Ahmed, declared himself the rightful ruler of the country and began
organizing forces and marched on the capital. In March, el-Wazir marched into the capital and by March 15
he had full control of the government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The insurrection was led by the eldest son of the former Imam but it does not appear that he was affiliated
with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops supporting the insurrection of
el-Wazir. However, it is clear that the force was considerably stronger than those supporting the government.

Newstartdate: 2/22/1948

Keesing’s Record of World Events in March 1948 reported that “the Secretary-General of the Arab League,
Azzam Pasha, confirmed in Cairo on Feb. 22 that a state of civil war existed in Yemen.”

Newendate: 3/15/1948

Keesing’s Record of World Events in April 1948 reported that “It was confirmed by the Arab League in
Cairo on March 15 that Prince Seif Ahmed, the eldest son of the assassinated Imam Yahya, was in full control
of Sanaa, the Yemenite capital, and had proclaimed himself as the new Imam; that Abdullah el-Wazir, who
had attempted to seize the throne had been imprisoned.”

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Yemen (North) vs. Royalists (conflict id 1330, dyad 410)

Conflict Summary: The Arab Republic of Yemen (commonly referred to as North Yemen) gained
independence from the Ottoman Empire upon its dissolution in 1918. For the next thirty years North Yemen
was ruled by a monarchical government led by Imam Yahya. In 1948, Yahya was assassinated in a coup,
however, his son went to war and quickly took power again (see conflict id 1330, dyad 400). Imam Ahmad
ruled until his death in September 1962 and was succeeded by his son, Muhammad. However, his reign only
lasted one week before his government was overthrown by a military coup and a republican government was
declared. Much as his father had, Muhammad went to the countryside and rallied forces to help him regain
power. An eight-year civil war followed between the “royalist” forces that Muhammad was able to organize
and the Republican forces. However, by 1970 the royalists had been largely defeated and in the “Compromise
of 1970” the North Yemeni combatants agreed to the formation of a Republican government which included
some royalist elements, and the Imam and his family went into exile.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The royalist forces were led by the man who had been the Imam of North Yemen for a week. His
government was not recognized by the Republican government, however.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the royalists.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the North Yemen government, particularly given that the
government received large amounts of support from Egyptian forces.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The royalist forces did not have a command structure as there was a royalist government in exile. However,
the forces also experienced a high degree of fractionalization throughout the conflict.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Burma vs. Kachin Insurgents (conflict id 1340)

Conflict Summary: Myanmar (formerly Burma) has experienced civil war throughout its entire post-colonial
history. Much of the fighting has been driven by minority groups seeking to achieve greater autonomy from
the state. In the north, one of the major insurgencies has been led by groups supporting the Kachin. The
Kachin are a minority group in the north and their region has been one of the poorest in Burma since
independence. In 1949, a brief rebellion was led by the Pawngywng National Defense Force (PNDF) aimed
at promoting greater autonomy and development for the Kachin region, however, it was unsuccessful and the
PNDF forces were quickly driven into exile in China. A decade of relative stability followed this insurrection,
however, two policies adopted by the Burmese government in 1960 generated grievance in the Kachin
province and led to the outbreak of a new conflict. First, the Burmese government made Buddhism the
official state religion, which provoked outrage among the Christian Kachin population. Second, the Burmese
government agreed to transfer control of parts of the Kachin region to China. In 1961, the Kachin
Independence Organization (KIO) launched an armed challenge against the Burmese government, beginning
a conflict that would last for more than thirty years. The group initially was quite small, but over the course of
the conflict was able to rally more troops and present a significant challenge to a Burmese army that was
spread thin by numerous conflicts. Throughout much of the conflict, the KIO received support from China,
however, improving relations between China and Burma throughout the 1980s led to Chinese pressure on the
group to negotiate. In 1993, the KIO and the Burmese government negotiated a ceasefire and in 1994, the
KIO were given the right to government a Kachin province with more autonomy. The conflict has been
dormant since 1993.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Burma vs. PNDF

Rebpolwing: no

The PNDF was an insurgent group and did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops controlled by the PNDF.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Burmese army.

Dyad: Burma vs. KIO

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Kachin Independence Organization (KIO) is a political organization, with a military wing, the Kachin
Independence Army (KIA).

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 100
Rebesthigh: 8,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The KIO grew rapidly across the course of the conflict. Fredholm (1993, p. 149-) writes that the group had
less than a hundred troops when it began its insurgency, had grown to 3,000 troops by the late 1960s and to

8,000 by the late 1970s. The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the KIO had 8,000 troops from 1989-
1993.

Armsproc: moderate

The KIO was supplied arms by the Chinese government throughout much of the conflict.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1961

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict had reached 25 battledeaths by December 31, 1961.

Newendate: 10/30/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that a de-facto ceasefire was in place beginning in October 1992. This
was followed by an official ceasefire signed in 1993.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: Guatemala vs. Forces of Carlos Castillo Armas (conflict id 1360, dyad 440)

Conflict Summary: On June 18, 1954, Colonel Castillo Armas and a group of 5,000-6,000 men invaded
Guatemala from Honduras. Colonel Castillo Armas had been based in Honduras after being exiled for
political reasons from Guatemala and was upset over the current government’s alleged softness on
communism. Castillo Armas’ forces marched into Guatemala on July 3 and a new government was
established with the Colonel in charge. The “liberation army” that Colonel Castillo Armas had used to gain
power was not dissolved, however, and the presence of an additional military force outside the regular army
led to tensions. On August 2, 1954, a group of military soldiers attacked some members of the liberation
army in protest of the presence of this additional armed forces. After this conflict, President Castillo Armas
agreed to disband the liberation army.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

This conflict was between members of the military and the liberation army that Colonel Castillo Armas had
used to take power and was not a political dispute.

Rebestimate: 5,500
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: parity

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives reported in July 17-24, 1954 that both the government forces and those
loyal to Colonel Castillo Armas numbered between 5,000 and 6,000.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Guatemala vs. Leftist Insurgents (conflict id 1360, dyads 450 and 470)

Conflict Summary: The Central American state of Guatemala experienced one of the longest running left-
wing insurgencies in the world. Guatemala has throughout its independent history had an incredibly high level
of income inequality as its economic and political system has been almost entirely controlled by plantation
owners and international corporations. The Guatemalan conflict began on November 13, 1960 when a group
of liberal military officers attempted a coup d’etat against the Guatemalan President. The coup was
unsuccessful but the officers fled to the hills and formed the 13

of November Movement, the first left-wing

guerilla organization. In 1965, the M-13 split and a new group, the Rebel Armed Forces (FAR) was added to
the conflict. At the same time, the Guatemalan insurgency escalated and 1965 was the first year that at least
25 battledeaths occurred.

Over the next thirty years the state of Guatemala battled a left-wing insurgency. As the conflict

progressed, additional groups joined the fighting including the Guerilla Army of the Poor (EGP), the
Organization of Armed People (ORPA) and the Guatemalan Worker’s Party (PGT). The government
responded to the conflict both by pushing economic and agrarian reforms that increased the livelihood of
peasants and by pursuing the guerilla organizations with vigor. These policies were effective, the guerilla
organizations never grew very large, however, the Guatemalan government was never able to completely
defeat the insurgents.

In 1982, the four major guerilla organizations—EGP, ORPA, PGT and FAR united to form the

Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity (URNG). The government initially responded with high levels of
repression, however, when that did not work dual approaches of increasing aid to peasant and indigenous
communities (the main supporters of URNG) and negotiations were attempted. Negotiations carried on for a
long time before an agreement was reached, however, in March 1996 the government and URNG signed a
cease-fire. Later that year, the parties signed a peace agreement which made the Guatemalan military and
intelligence services subservient to the democratically elected government and the conflict ended.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Guatemala vs. MR-13

Rebpolwing: no

MR-13 was a group of liberal army officers who attempted a revolt and then fled to the Guatemalan hills and
was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the MR-13.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Guatemalan army.

Newendate: 12/31/1982

No reference could be found for when MR-13 dropped out of the conflict. However, it appears that after
1982 the URNG was the only significant anti-government group in Guatemala so the conflict between the
government and MR-13 is coded as ending in that year.

Dyad: Guatemala vs. FAR

Rebpolwing: no

The FAR was a group that broke off from MR-13 and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by FAR. However, it
is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Guatemalan army.

Newendate: 3/6/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first use of armed force by URNG (the alliance of FAR with
the three other main guerilla organizations) was on March 6, 1982.

Dyad: Guatemala vs. EGP

Rebpolwing: no

The Guerilla Army of the Poor as a military organization and does not appear to have been affiliated with a
political group.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the EGP.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Guatemalan army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1976

In June 1978, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that the EGP became active in the conflict in
1976.

Newendate: 3/6/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first use of armed force by URNG (the alliance of EGP with
the three other main guerilla organizations) was on March 6, 1982.

Dyad: Guatemala vs. ORPA

Rebpolwing: no

ORPA was a military organization and does not appear to have been affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by ORPA. However,
it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Guatemalan army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1979

In October 1981 Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that ORPA formed “officially” in 1979.

Newendate: 3/6/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first use of armed force by URNG (the alliance of ORPA was
the three other main guerilla organizations) was on March 6, 1982.

Dyad: Guatemala vs. PGT

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Guatemalan Worker’s Party was a political and military organization. In March 1971, Keesing’s Record
of World Events reported that the PGT was illegal.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the PGT.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Guatemalan army.

Newendate: 3/6/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first use of armed force by URNG (the alliance of PGT with
the three other main guerilla organizations) was on March 6, 1982.

Dyad: Guatemala vs. URNG

Rebpolwing: no

URNG was an alliance of guerilla organizations and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 800
Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) provides the following estimates for the troop
strength of the URNG: in 1986 and 1987: 2,000-2,500; in 1988: 1,000-2,000; in 1989: 1,500-2,000; in 1990:
1,000-2,000; in 1991 and 1992: 1,000; in 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996: 800-1,100. Additionally, SIPRI reports
that government offensives in the period 1983-1986 cut URNG’s troop strength more than in half, which
would mean the group had at least 5,000 troops in that period. These estimates are in comparison to 32,000-
44,200 troops for the Guatemalan army.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Guatemalan government and the
URNG reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1982.

Newendate: 12/31/1995

Although a final peace deal between the government and URNG was not reached until 1996, 1995 was the
last year in which fighting produced 25 battledeaths.

Sources:

Conflict: Guatemala vs. Military Faction (conflict id 1360, dyad 460)

Conflict Summary: On July 18, 1949 a group of military officers attempted a coup d’etat against the
Guatemalan government. The coup was in response to the assassination of the chief of the armed forces,
Colonel Francisco Arana. However, the bulk of the military remained loyal to the government and the
insurgents were defeated on July 19 when forces loyal to the government seized the rebel headquarters at
Forst Guardia de Honor.

Rebpolwing: no

The coup d’etat was carried out by military officers in reaction to the assassination of the chief of the armed
forces and does not appear to have been affiliated with any political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that participated in the coup
d’etat. However, it is clear that the majority of the troops stayed loyal to the government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Israel vs. PLO Groups (conflict id 1370, dyad 480)

Conflict Summary: Israel, a Jewish state located in the heavily-Arab Middle East, has experienced a high level
of both external and internal conflict in its independent history. Externally, the state has fought several wars
with its neighbors, including one which began the day after Israel became a state in May 1948. Internally, the
primary axis of conflict has been between the state of Israel and Palestinians who live in the occupied
territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Members of both the Palestinian and Israeli populations claim
the territory currently comprising Israel and the occupied territories, and the main issue of contention has
been how and if that land would be divided.

Throughout the conflict, the main Palestinian organization battling the Israeli state has been Fatah,

the militant wing of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) led by Yassir Arafat. Beginning in the mid
1960s, Fatah led terrorist attacks against Israel and Israeli targets overseas that included bombings and
airplane hijackings. Fatah remained the main Palestinian group battling Israel until the 1980s, when a number
of other prominent groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad emerged. While Fatah was formed by
Palestinians living in exile, Hamas and Islamic Jihad both formed in the occupied territories and have been
two of the main organizations behind major terrorist attacks in Israel.

In addition to its clashes with groups in the occupied territories, Israel has also faced attacks from

groups based in other states, such as the Lebanese Hezbollah. Hezbollah began attacking Israeli targets
following Israel’s invasion and occupation of southern Lebanon during the Lebanese civil war (see conflict id
1630).

In the 1990s, the Israeli government and Palestinian groups (primarily Fatah) made several attempts

at reaching a negotiated settlement. Some initial progress was made, and Israel pulled out of parts of the Gaza
Strip and West Bank and allowed the creation of a Palestinian Authority. Final-status negotiations in 2000
were unable to generate agreement on central issues such as the status of Jerusalem and the return of millions
of Palestinian refugees, and the conflict escalated again. The period from 2000 to 2003 saw a high number of
terrorist attacks against Israel and the conflict was ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Israel vs. Fatah

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first describes the first thirty years of the conflict leading
up to signing of an agreement in 1993. The second covers the return to conflict after the breakdown of final-
status negotiations in 2000.

Period 1: 1965-1993

Rebpolwing: no

Prior to the negotiations in 1993, Fatah was a militant insurgent group and not a political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that Fatah had 4,500 troops between 1989 and 1992. These
estimates are in comparison to 175,000 troops possessed by the Israeli army.

Newendate: 9/13/1993

On September 13, 1993, Fatah and the Israeli government signed a peace agreement which led to the creation
of a Palestinian Authority and Fatah transformed into a political party.

Period 2: 2000-ongoing

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

Fatah is a political organization which is the ruling party in the Palestinian Authority.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 2000 Fatah had 2,000 troops. This estimate is in comparison
to over 100,000 troops possessed by the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 11/1/2000

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by November 1, 2000, the conflict between the Israeli
government and Fatah had again reached 25 battledeaths.

Dyad: Israel vs. Hamas

Rebpolwing: no

Hamas is a militant organization dedicated to reclaiming all territory of current Israel and the occupied
territories and does not operate as a political organization within Palestine.

Rebestimate: 400
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the number of troops possessed by
Hamas: In 1993, 1994 and 1996: 300; in 2000: 500; in 2001: no estimate; in 2002 and 2003: 500. These
estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 troops possessed by the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 9/12/1993

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths on September 12, 1993.

Dyad: Israel vs. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)

Rebpolwing: no

The PFLP is a militant organization dedicated to destroying Israel and creating a democratic socialist
Palestine. It does not act as a political organization.

Rebestimate: 900
Rebestlow: 800
Rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989, the PFLP had 900 troops, in 2001 it had 800 and in
2003 it had 1,000.

Newstartdate: 5/31/1972

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Israel and the PFLP first reached 25
battledeaths on May 31, 1972.

Dyad: Israel vs. Hezbollah

Rebpolwing: no

Hezbollah is a Lebanese organization opposed to Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon and does not
represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: 3,000
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 3,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of Hezbollah: In 1990
and 1991: 3,500; in 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996: 3,000; in 1997, 1998 and 1999: 300-500. These estimates
are in comparison to over 100,000 troops for the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 11/9/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah first reached 25
battledeaths on November 9, 1990.

Newendate: 12/31/1999

Although the conflict has continued through the end of 2003, it has not again generated 25 battledeaths in a
year since 1999.

Dyad: Israel vs. al-Aqsa Martyr’s Brigade (AMB)

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

AMB is connected with Fatah.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources provide any information as to the troop strength of AMB. However, it is clear
that the group is considerably weaker than the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 3/26/2002

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Israel and AMB first reached 25 battledeaths
on March 26, 2002.

Dyad: Israel vs. Palestinian National Authority (PNA)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Palestinian National Authority is the recognized government of the Palestinian Authority.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 29,000
Rebesthigh: 35,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the PNA: In 1996,
1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001: 35,000; in 2002: 29,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000
troops for the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 9/25/1996

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Israel and the PNA first reached 25
battledeaths on September 25, 1996.

Dyad: Israel vs. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC)

Rebpolwing: no

PFLP-GC is a militant organization dedicated to eliminating Israel and does not represent a political
organization.

Rebestimate: 1,000
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989 PFLP-GC had 500-2,000 troops and in 2003 it had
500. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 troops possessed by the Israeli army.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1974

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Israel and the PFLP-GC had reached 25
battledeaths by December 31, 1974.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

Conflict: China vs. Tibet (conflict id 1390)

Conflict Summary: Tibet, which had been incorporated into China in the late 18

century, gained

independence in the Chinese revolution of 1911. Tibet stayed independent until 1950 and was protected from
China by the British, who had a strong colonial presence in Asia. However, in the aftermath of World War II
Britain’s presence in the region was dwindling and the colonial power was no longer willing to protect Tibet’s
independence. In 1950, two years after the communist revolution, the Chinese army invaded Tibet and took
control of the province. In 1951, the governments of Tibet and China signed an agreement (under heavy
Chinese pressure) making Tibet an autonomous region within China. Despite this agreement, Tibetan
nationalists continued to push for independence and several violent clashes occurred between Tibetan and
Chinese forces. In 1959, the most violent episode occurred with an uprising in Lhasa, the capital of Tibet.
The uprising was quickly suppressed and the leadership of Tibet, including the Dalai Lama, fled into exile.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Tibetan uprisings were led by the government of Tibet, which was recognized by China as autonomous.

Rebestimate: 22,500
Rebestlow: 15,000
Rebesthigh: 30,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Norbu (2001) estimates that 15,000 “partisans” participated in the uprising in 1956 and 30,000 participated in
the uprising in 1959.

Sources:

•

Norbu, Dawa (2001).

China’s Tibet Policy

. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.

•

Encylopedia Britannica

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Indonesia vs. Republic of South Moluccas (conflict id 1400)

Conflict Summary: Indonesia was granted independence by the Netherlands in the aftermath of World War II
and emerged as a federal republic. The republic had a huge diversity of languages and religion and quickly
faced challenges from groups trying to gain more autonomy from the state. One of the early rebellions that
the Indonesian republic faced was from the islands around Amboina, collectively referred to as the Moluccas.
On April 26, 1950, the regional government in Amboina announced the secession of those islands and the
creation of an independent Republic of South Moluccas. Negotiation attempts by the Indonesian government
were rebuffed and in the fall of 1950, Indonesian troops landed on Amboina and launched a military
campaign to reintegrate the renegade republic. Although the Amboinese unit of troops were one of the better
fighting forces in Indonesian they were not a match for the federal army and by the end of the year the
rebellion had been quelled.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The secession of Amboina and the neighboring islands was led by the regional government in Amboina.
However, the newly independent Republic of South Moluccas was not recognized by the Indonesian
government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

On May 7, 1950, the New York Times reported that there were an estimated 5,000 troops on the island of
Amboina alone.

Source:

•

New York Times

Conflict: United States vs. Puerto Rican Nationalist Party (conflict id 1410)

Conflict Summary: In October-November 1950, there was a brief conflict between authorities on the island
of Puerto Rico and a small group of Puerto Rican nationalists who were opposed to a new constitution on
the status of the island. Puerto Rican residents were United States citizens but the island was not a state in the
U.S. While many Puerto Ricans supported statehood, the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, which had formed
in 1928, supported independence for the island. On October 30, 1950, members of the Puerto Rican
nationalist party attacked governmental officials and killed several police officers and fire fighters. Several of
the nationalists were killed as well. On November 1, two Puerto Rican nationalists attempted to assassinate
United States president Dwight Eisenhower. The rebellion on Puerto Rico was quickly quelled by the
authorities but the violence cost the lives of approximately 27 people.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Puerto Rican Nationalist Party was a political organization founded in the 1920s.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: weaker

The New York Times reported that the Governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Munoz Marin, claimed that the
nationalist party had no more than 500 members.

Source:

•

New York Times

Conflict: Thailand vs. Communist Party of Thailand (conflict id 1430, dyad 530)

Conflict Summary: Thailand, like many of its southeast Asian neighbors, faced a communist insurgency
during the Cold War. The insurgency in Thailand, however, was not as strong as in states such as Laos,
Cambodia and Vietnam and the state itself was never really threatened. The Communist Party of Thailand
(CPT) formed in the 1920s and was relatively popular among the country’s minority populations, particularly
the ethnic Chinese. The CTP began an armed insurgency against the Thai state in the aftermath of World War
II, however, it did not benefit from an anti-colonial struggle the way that communist parties in other
southeast Asian states did (Thailand was never colonized and was only briefly occupied by Japan during
World War II). Still, the CPT benefited from support from China and North Vietnam and by the 1970s the
group did represent a significant fighting force. The conflict escalated until 1980, however, at that point the
combination of a decrease in Chinese support to the CPT and new policies adopted by the government led to
a weakening of the CPT. By the end of 1982 the group had been severely depleted and although the conflict
continued after that, it did so at a very low intensity.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Thailand was a political organization. However, it and other communist
organizations were made illegal in 1952.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 4,000
Rebesthigh: 12,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Thailand: A Country Study

reports that the CPT had 12,000 troops in 1979 but had declined in 4,000 by the end

of 1982.

Source:

•

LePoer, Barbara Leitch (1987).

Thailand: A Country Study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: Thailand vs. Military Faction (Navy) (conflict id 1430, dyad 540)

Conflict Summary: On June 29, 1951, the Thailand Navy attempted a coup d’etat by abducting the Prime
Minister, Pibul Songgram, and placing him under arrest. The army, air force, and police forces all remained
loyal to the government, however, and quickly launched an attack against the naval forces. They were quickly
defeated and Pibul escaped, and order was restored (although the government was overthrown in a
subsequent coup d’etat led by all of the armed forces later that year).

Rebpolwing: no

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives in July 14-21, 1951 reported that the “revolt had no ideological
significance.”

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave an indication as to the number of troops that participated in the coup
attempt. However, while the Navy organized the coup, the remainder of the armed forces stayed loyal to the
government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. Mau Mau (conflict id 1440)

Conflict Summary: In the 1950s, the British colonial authority faced an anti-colonial uprising in Kenya led by
a group called the Mau Mau. The Mau Mau were a group drawn primarily from Kenya’s dominant Kikuyu
tribe and, despite its appeal to traditional Kikuyu ritual, gained support from prominent figures such as the
politicial Jomo Kenyatta, who would later become Kenya’s first President. Although the Mau Mau had more
soldiers than the British colonial authority they were not a match militarily, however, the Mau Mau rebellion
did prove quite costly for the British. The conflict de-escalated in 1956 after Britain had cracked down on the
Mau Mau, but it had continued at a low level of intensity until Kenya achieved independence in the early
1960s.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Mau Mau was a Kikuyu-dominated anti-colonial rebellion and was not affiliated with a political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 120,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com estimates that the Mau Mau had 120,000 forces while the British colonial authority 51,000
troops. However, the British troops were much better equipped and trained.

Source:

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: Cuba vs. Military Faction (conflict id 1450, dyad 560)

Conflict Summary: On July 26, 1953, a group of military officers attacked two outposts in an attempted coup
d’etat against President Batista. The coup was unsuccessful and the government responded by suspending a
large number of constitutional guarantees for ninety days. The coup plotters were allegedly supporters of
former President Carlos Prio, who had been overthrown by Batista in a military coup the previous year.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the military officers were allegedly affiliated with the previous President, Carlos Prio, he was in exile
in the United States and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrenth: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that participated in the coup
attempt. However, it was clearly a minority of the military and they were quickly defeated.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Cuba vs. 26

of July Movement (conflict id 1450, dyad 570)

Conflict Summary: Fidel Castro, then a law student, began his armed campaign against the Cuban
government on July 26, 1953. He led a group of less than 200 troops in an attack in Oriente province that was
quickly defeated. Castro surrendered and was placed in jail, however, he was released shortly thereafter in an
amnesty. In 1957, Castro formed another small organization again dedicated to overthrowing Cuban dictator
Batista. The 26

of July movement, named after the events in 1953, started out very small but proved more

resilient than the previous organization. It grew across 1957 and 1958 from a force of only a few hundred to
over 3,000 troops and gained in strength against the army. On January 1, 1959, Batista fled and Castro soon
became President of Cuba.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The 26

of July Movement was formed as an organization dedicated to removing Batista and did not have an

explicit political agenda of its own.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 62
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The 26

of July Movement grew in strength across the course of the two year conflict. On January 2, 1959,

the

New York Times

reported that the organization started in 1956 wit 62 troops, it had only grown to 400

“riflemen” by February 1958 and that in late December 1958 it had about 3,000 troops.

Source:

•

New York Times

Conflict: Cuba vs. National Revolutionary Council and USA (conflict id 1450, dyad 580)

Conflict Summary: Following Fidel Castro’s ascension to power in Cuba (see conflict id 1450, dyad 570), a
large number of Cuban refugees left the country and went to the neighboring U.S. Some of these refugees
included those who had fought alongside Castro against President Batista and participated in the early months
of Castro’s government. In 1961, a group of approximately 1,000 these refugees, assisted by the United States
military, launched an attack back into Cuba aimed at removing Castro. The Cuban military proved too much
for the refugees, however, and the attack was quickly repelled. Hundreds of the insurgents were arrested and
it was an international embarrassment for the United States government.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Cuba vs. National Revolutionary Council

Rebpolwing: no

The National Revolutionary Council was a group of Cuban refugees dedicated to overthrowing Castro and
creating a democratic government. They were not affiliated with a political movement within Cuba, however.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in June 1961 reported that Fidel Castro estimated that the invaders
numbered over 1,000.

Newendate: 4/20/1970

Keesing’s Record of World Events in June 1961 reported that the Cuban government announced on April 20
that the attempted invasion had been completely repelled.

Dyad: Cuba vs. USA

Rebpolwing: does not apply

The United States was a foreign participant in this conflict and so did not represent a domestic Cuban
political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops, if any, the United States
deployed in this invasion. However, it is clear that the force was weaker than the Cuban army.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Indonesia vs. Darul Islam, PRRI and Permesta (conflict id 1460)

Conflict Summary: When Indonesia achieved independence and adopted a new constitution in 1950, a
parliamentary democracy was established with a President, Sukarno, who had weak constitutional powers.
Although Indonesia was officially a unified state, it faced opposition from a number of different groups that
were upset about the way the government was structured. The first rebellion arose from the Darul Islam
movement in West Java, a group that was opposed to the secular nature of the Indonesian state. The Darul
Islam set up an unrecognized government in West Java (and also controlled parts of Aceh and Sulawesi)
which brought them into direct conflict with the Indonesian government. Armed conflict occurred in 1953
and continued through 1961 when the government was able to completely defeat the rebels.

As the 1950s wore on, Sukarno took more power for himself and became increasingly authoritarian.

In protest, the Vice President, Mohammad Hatta, resigned in December 1956, and his followers in Sumatra
set up a parallel government, the Revolutionary Government of the Indonesian Republic (PRRI). The conflict
between the Indonesian government and the PRRI continued until 1961, however, by 1958 the PRRI had
been largely defeated. The PRRI was joined by the Permesta rebels, a group of rebellions military officers
who had revolted when they were going to be moved out of their bases in Sumatra. Sukarno was able to
weather the storm of these anti-governmental insurgencies and by 1961 virtually all of the rebels had been
defeated.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Indonesia vs. Darul Islam

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Darul Islam established a parallel government in West Java that ruled that province and part of
neighboring Aceh and Sulawesi. However, the government was not recognized by the Indonesian
government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Darul Islam
movement. However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Indonesian army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: West Java, Parts of Aceh and Sulawesi
Effterrcont: high

Darul Islam established a parallel government in West Java (which also controlled parts of Aceh and
Sulawesi) and was effectively the only government in that region throughout the conflict.

Dyad: Indonesia vs. PRRI

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The PRRI had close ties to Indonesian political parties such as the Indonesian Socialist Party, which were
legal for the majority of the conflict (the Indonesian Social Party was declared illegal in August 1960).

Rebestimate: unclear

Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the PRRI
government. However, it is clear that the government was weaker than the Indonesian army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Sumatra
Effterrcont: moderate

The PRRI was able to establish a government in Sumatra that had a good degree of control over the region.

Dyad: Indonesia vs. Permesta Rebels

Rebpolwing: no

The Permesta Rebels were military officers who did not want to be transferred out of their region. Later, they
fought with the PRRI government but they were not directly affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Permesta
rebels. However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Indonesian army.

Sources:

•

Onwar.com

•

Ricklefs, M.C. (1993).

A History of Modern Indonesia since c. 1300

. Stanford, CA: Stanford University

Press.

•

Frederick, William H. and Robert L. Worden (1992).

Indonesia: a country study

. Washington, DC:

Library of Congress.

Conflict: France vs. Istiqlal (conflict id 1470)

Conflict Summary: Much of North Africa, including Morocco was colonized by France. In the 1950s, France
faced anti-colonial insurgencies in many of their North African colonies. In Morocco, this struggle was led by
the Istiqlal, or nationalist, party, a left-wing pro-independence party with ties to the Moroccan Communist
Party. From 1953 to 1956 Istiqlal conducted terrorist attacks against colonial targets and Moroccans
suspected of being in favor of the colonial regime. These attacks resulted in the deaths of over 700 people
and over 2,000 injuries.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Istiqlal was a political party that also used violence. The party was illegal for most of the conflict as it was
outlawed after launched terrorist attacks in 1952. In 1955, the party was legal and indeed was the dominant
party in the pre-independence Moroccan cabinet (Morocco achieved independence in 1956), however, it was
illegal for the majority of the armed conflict.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by Istiqlal. However,
it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the French colonial authority.

Newendate: 3/2/1956

Morocco became independent from France on March 2, 1956.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: France vs. National Liberation Army (conflict id 1480)

Conflict Summary: France colonized much of North Africa, including Tunisia. In the 1950s, France faced
anti-colonial struggles in a number of its North African colonies. In Tunisia, the anti-colonial insurrection was
led by fellaghas (or nationalist guerillas) who jointly were sometimes referred to as a National Liberation
Army. The fellaghas conducted a series of terrorist attacks against French targets. In 1956, Tunisia gained
independence from France and the conflict ended.

Rebpolwing: no

The fellaghas were militant groups dedicated to promoting Tunisian independence and do not appear to have
been affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: 1,600
Rebestlow: 1,200
Rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives of December 11-18, 1954, reported that the French colonial authority
estimated the fellaghas had about 1,200 guerillas while the French newspaper

Le Monde

estimated that they

had about 2,000 guerillas.

Newendate: 3/20/1956

On March 20, 1956, France signed an agreement recognizing Tunisia’s independence.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: France vs. Algerian groups (conflict id 1490)

Conflict Summary: Algeria was the site of one of the bloodiest anti-colonial wars in the world. Algeria was a
settler colony and had a large population of Europeans. However, differences between this settler
population/colonial authority and the majority Algerian population, which was almost exclusively Islamic, led
to grievances. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, a number of political organizations formed and began
pushing for independence. In 1954, one of these groups, the National Liberation Front, opened a guerilla
campaign aimed at colonial government and military targets. This approach did not achieve much, however,
and in 1955 the group switched to a strategy of attacking civilian targets as well. The French colonial authority
responded with massive amounts of force and the conflict quickly escalated. By the mid-1950s, Algeria was
immersed in a full-scale civil war which would lead to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. The main axis
of conflict was between the French colonial authority and the FLN, there were other Algerian insurgent
groups such as the National Algerian Movement (MNA), however, they were quickly defeated by the main
belligerents. The conflict between the FLN and the French army raged for eight years, with the only brief
interlude being a cease-fire agreement signed between the FLN and the government in 1961. However, a
group of generals based in Algeria rejected the agreement and attacked the FLN there, which led the French
government to finally consent to grant independence. In 1962, Algeria became an independent state after
enduring an incredibly bloody war.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: France vs. FLN

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The FLN was a political and military organization; however, it was not legal in French Algeria.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Algeria: A Country Study

reports that by 1957 the FLN had almost 40,000 troops.

Terrcont: no

Algeria: A Country Study

reports that during the conflict the FLN did gain control of Algerian territory.

However, the group was not able to hold any specific piece of territory for very long.

Newendate: 7/3/1962

On July 3, 1962, French President Charles de Gaulle declared Algeria independent.

Dyad: France vs. MNA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The MNA was a political and military organization; however, it was not legal in French Algeria.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

Conflict: Argentina vs. Left-wing Groups (conflict id 1500, dyad 640)

Conflict Summary: In the 1970s, like many of its Latin American counterparts, Argentina faced guerilla
warfare from extreme left-wing groups. In Argentina, there were two primary groups—the Revolutionary
Workers Party (ERP), a Trotskyite organization, and the Montoneros, a “Peronista” organization. The height
of the conflict actually occurred during a brief interlude of democratic rule from 1973 to 1976. Hector
Campora, a Peronist, won elections in 1973 but then stepped down and Juan Peron, the former dictator who
ruled Argentina from 1945 to 1955, won new elections. Peron died in 1974 and was succeeded by his wife,
Isabel, however, she exercised very little control over the army who were the major power in government.
Despite the Peronist ties of the Montoneros, the group was opposed to the alignment between Juan Peron
and the more conservative elements of his party, and they and the ERP carried out terrorist attacks against
the government. In 1976, Isabel Peron was removed by the army and replaced with a military junta that began
a series of kidnappings, murders and “disappearings” targeted at suspected leftists. This policy would be
referred to as the “dirty war,” and was effective at ending the left-wing insurgency. By the enof 977, both the
Montoneros and the ERP had been soundly defeated.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Argentina vs. ERP

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Revolutionary Worker’s Party was a political party. However, throughout most of the guerilla warfare it
was not a legal political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ERP.
However, the group existed primarily through carrying out terrorist attacks and was not a very strong military
force.

Dyad: Argentina vs. Montoneros

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Montoneros were a legal political party until 1974, however, they were banned in that year and so were
illegal for most of the conflict.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Montoneros.
However, the group was primarily a terrorist organization and did not have a significant military capacity.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Torre, Juan Carlos and Liliana de Riz (1991). “Argentina since 1946.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.,

The

Cambridge History of Latin America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Conflict: Argentina vs. Military Faction of 1955 (conflict id 1500, dyad 650)

Conflict Summary: Juan Peron became President of Argentina in 1945. In the mid-1950s opposition to his
regime increased and by 1955, he faced domestic opposition from members of the military and opposition
political groups as well as international pressure from the Vatican. In June, 1955, an internal uprising against
Peron’s government was quickly surpressed; however, the subsequent stability would prove temporary. On
September 16, another insurrection broke out led by officers of the military in the Argentina countryside.
Despite the government’s insistence that it was effectively containing the militants, within days the military
units opposed to the government had captured all of the country outside of Buenos Aries. On September 19,
President Peron resigned, and he was subsequently replaced by a military government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although Peron faced domestic political opposition, the military officers who led the coup were not affiliated
with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the available sources gave information which would allow for estimating the number of troops on
the side of the insurgents. However, it is clear that the majority of the military supported the insurgency.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Argentina vs. Military Faction of 1963 (conflict id 1500, dyad 650)

Conflict Summary: Argentina experienced a sucession of military coups, both attempted and successful, in the
20

century. In April 1963, the military government of Argentina faced a revolt by the navy. The navy

revolted in reaction to a government plan to hold elections in June 1963 and to fears that a party loyal to
former dictator Juan Peron would gain power. The navy forces launched the revolt against the government
on April 2, 1963, but were no match for the army and air force which stayed loyal. By April 3 the revolt had
ended, however, an estimated 25 people were killed and several tanks were destroyed in the fighting.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The revolt was led by the navy which was opposed to elections including a Peronista party, but was not
affiliated with a political organization of its own.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops which supported the revolt.
However, it is clear that the majority of Argentina’s armed forces stayed loyal to the government.

Source:

•

New York Times

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. EOKA (conflict id 1510)

Cyprus is an island with a population that is majority Greek and minority Turkish. In the early 20

century,

Cyprus was a colony in the British Empire. In the 1950s, a group of Greek Cypriots led by Archbishop
Makarios and generally referred to as the National Union of Cypriot Fighters (EOKA) began pushing for the
island to be united with Greece. From 1955 to 1959, EOKA conducted terrorist attacks against British
colonial targets and against Turkish Cypriots. By 1959, the conflict had largely petered out and many EOKA
operatives had been arrested.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

EOKA was a terrorist organization and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by EOKA. However,
it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the British authority.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

•

Onwar.com

Conflict: South Vietnam vs. FLN (conflict id 1520)

Conflict Summary: North and South Vietnam became independent states in 1954. In the north, a communist
government led by the Viet Minh took power (see conflict id 1170). In the south, the government was led by
Ngo Dinh Diem who received heavy support from the United States. Almost immediately upon
independence, the North Vietnamese government began providing support to various southern Vietnamese
communist groups who fought under the banner the National Liberation Front (FLN). Despite the assistance
of United States military advisers, the U.S.-trained South Vietnamese army had difficulty defeating the FLN.
Additionally, the repressive tactics the Diem government used to respond to the conflict, such as village
resettlement programs, led to increased opposition to his government and increased the support of the FLN.
Throughout the late 1950s and early 1960s the United States and North Vietnam escalated their involvement
in the South Vietnamese conflict to the point where, around 1965, it no longer makes sense to treat the
conflict as a civil war in South Vietnam but rather as an interstate war between the United States/South
Vietnam and North Vietnam.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The National Liberation Front was a network of communist organizations in South Vietnam. The group was
not a legal political party.

Rebestimate: 40,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 80,000
Rebstrength: parity

The strength of the FLN grew almost linearly across the course of the conflict. In February 1962, Keesing’s
Record of World Events reported that while the Viet Cong (another name for the FLN) had only had 6,000-
7,000 guerillas in 1960 it had 20,000 by the end of 1961. In April 1964, Keesing’s Record of World Events
reported that the U.S. government estimated that the Viet Cong had about 20,000 “hard-core” guerillas, with
an additional 60,000-80,000 irregular forces.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Cima, Ronald J. Ed. (1987).

Vietnam: A Country Study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: India vs. Naga Groups (conflict id 1540)

Conflict Summary: India has faced a number of insurgencies from groups seeking to gain more autonomy, up
to secession, from the state. One of the earliest of these insurgencies broke out in the Naga region of
northeast India. The Naga are a minority group that straddle the border of India with Myanmar. Many Naga
throughout India’s independent history have pushed for greater freedom for the region. In 1947, the Naga
Underground Rebels (NNC) launched an armed struggle against the Indian government to push for
autonomy for the region. The conflict escalated in the 1950s and in 1963, India agreed to set up a Naga state
within India. The conflict continued, however, into the 1970s when the NNC finally signed a peace
agreement with the Indian government.

Despite this agreement, some members of the NNC remained dedicated to the armed struggle. In

1978, a new organization, the Naga Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN) was formed dedicated to an
independent state that controlled all territories claimed by the Naga (which included parts of neighboring
Myanmar and parts of India outside of Naga state) that would have a government based on the philosophy of
Mao Tse Tung. The NSCN split into two groups shortly after its inception, with the faction led by Isaac Swu
and T. Muivah being the most dominant (NSCN-IM). The conflict between the Indian government and the
NSCN-IM remained at a low level of intensity until the early 1990s when it heated up again. In 1992, the
NSCN-IM launched a larger offensive that pushed the conflict over 25 battledeaths in one year for the first
time. In addition to its battles with the Indian government, the NSCN-IM has also targeted violence against
members of other ethnic groups living in Naga state in an attempt to ethnically cleanse the region.

In the 1990s, the Indian government opened a series of negotiations with the NSCN-IM. In 1997,

the group signed a ceasefire. Sporadic violence has continued since then, but at a lower level of intensity and
has not generated 25 battledeaths in a given year.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: India vs. NNC

Rebpolwing: no

The NNC was a military organization dedicated to forcing the Indian government to grant greater autonomy
and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the NNC.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Indian government.

Dyad: India vs. NSCN-IM

Rebpolwing: no

The NSCM-IM is a Maoist organization dedicated to violently creating an independent Naga state and is not
affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: 2,500
Rebestlow: 600
Rebesthigh: 4,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the NSCM-IM: In
1992: 600-1,500; in 1993: 1,500; in 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997: 1,500-4,500. These estimates are in
comparison to over a million troops possessed by the Indian army and over 200,000 troops deployed in
Nagaland specifically.

Newstartdate: 7/31/1992

The Uppsala Confict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the NSCM-IM first
reached 25 battledeaths on July 31, 1992.

Newendate: 8/1/1997

On August 1, 1997, the NSCM-IM signed a ceasefire agreement with the government. Although the conflict
has continued at a low level of intensity since the agreement, it has not reached 25 battledeaths in a given
year.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Onwar.com

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

Conflict: Burma vs. Karenni National Progressive Party (conflict id 1560)

Conflict Summary: The Karenni are a small minority group in Myanmar (formerly Burma) that is related to
the Karen ethnic group. Since Burma achieved independence in 1948, Karenni groups have campaigned for
Karenni self-determination. In 1957, the Karenni National Progressive Party was formed and it began waging
an armed campaign for self-determination. The group was marginal militarily; however, it has for more than
forty years been politically active on behalf of the Karenni and also has supported other Burmese insurgent
groups representing the Karen and Shan ethnic groups. In 1992 and 1996, the KNPP staged larger scale
attacks but with the exception of these rare occurrences the conflict between the KNPP and the government
has not reached 25 battledeaths in any other year.

Notes on Coding

Period 1: 1957

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The KNPP has acted as a political organization throughout its participation in the conflict.

Rebestimate: 500
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 700
Rebstrength: much weaker

Frendholm (1993) writes that the Karenni resistance movement in the 1950s consisted of “several hundred
armed men.”

Period 2: 1992, 1996

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The KNPP has acted as a political organization throughout its participation in the conflict.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1995 and 1996 the KNPP had about 1,000 fighters. This
estimate is in comparison to approximately 300,000 troops possessed by the Myanmar army.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Conflict: France vs. UPC (conflict id 1570)

Conflict Summary: Cameroon was divided between colonial powers during the colonial period. About 80% of
Cameroon was controlled by the French with additional territories in the southern and northern region
controlled by the British. In the aftermath of World War II, as nationalism was increasing across African
colonies, a Cameroon political party, the Union of the Populations of Cameroon (UPC), began pushing for
full independence and reunification of the Cameroon territories. In the 1950s, France started the process of
independence for Cameroon but the colonial powers were reluctant on unification, and the UPC began
waging guerilla warfare. In 1960, Cameroon became independent and the following year the southern British
Cameroon territory was unified (the northern region voted to join with Nigeria). However, the rebellion did
not end upon independence as the UPC continued to present an armed challenge to the Cameroon
government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The UPC was a political movement. However, its political organization operated primarily in exile during the
guerilla war.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the UPC.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the French army deployed in the colony.

Newendate: 1/1/1960

On January 1, 1960, Cameroon became an independent state and so this conflict should no longer be treated
as a civil war with France as the Side A actor.

Source:

•

Eyongetah, Tambi and Robert Brain (1974).

A History of the Cameroon

. London: Longman.

Conflict: France and Spain vs. National Liberation Army (conflict ids 1590 and 1600)

Conflict Summary: Much of northwestern Africa was colonized by France, including Morocco and
Mauritania. However, Spain colonized the western Saharan region, an area that has been the sight of conflict
for the last fifty years (see conflict id 2350). In the 1950s, as the colonial era was winding down, the French
North African colonies were granted more independence, Spain, however, held onto Western Sahara into the
1970s. As Morocco moved toward independence, the National Liberation Army which had struggled against
France for independence was transformed into the army of the state. However, some members of the
National Liberation Army remained outside of the control of the government and continued to struggle
against the colonial presence in north Africa. The National Liberation Army fought for the independence of
the Spanish Saharan colonies and their integration with Morocco. The Spainish and French army conducted
joint military operations against the insurgents and by 1958 the National Liberation Army had been defeated.
This conflict took place on Moroccan, Mauritanian and Spanish Saharan territory.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The National liberation Army was not a political organization.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 4,500
Rebesthigh; 5,500
Rebstrength: weaker

In December 1957, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that the National Libgeration army was
“estimated to number between 4,500 and 5,500 men.”

Newendate: 3/1/1958

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in June 1958 that on March 1 the Spanish army announced that
the conflict had ended.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Muscat and Oman, United Kingdom vs. State of Oman/Free Oman (conflict id 1610)

Conflict Summary: The Persian Gulf state of Muscat and Oman was independent in the 1950s but the sultan
of Muscat and Oman had close treaty relations with the United Kingdom. Prior to 1955, the province of
Oman within Muscat and Oman had been outside of the sultan’s control and ruled as a de-facto state by the
Imam of Oman, Sheikh Ghalib bin Ali. In 1955, the Sultan’s forces, supported by the United Kingdom, were
able to expel bin Ali and his supporters and to establish control over the province. In the summer of 1957,
however, the ex-Imam returned to Oman and led a rebellion against the sultan aimed at the creation of an
independent state of Oman. The insurrection was unsuccessful, however, as the United Kingdom provided
ground troops and air support to supplement the sultan’s forces and the Imam and his supporters were
quickly defeated, and control of the province was restored to the sultan.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The rebellion in Oman was led by the former leader of the province, who had run it as a de-facto state. His
government was not recognized by the sultan or the United Kingdom, however.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the insurgents.
However, it is clear that they were no match for the British forces which supported the sultan’s army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Villages of Oman Province
Effterrcont: low

The insurgents were able to gain control of some villages in Oman province in the brief war. However, they
did not hold them for long.

Newendate: 8/12/1957

Keesing’s Record of World Events in August 1957 reported that, “By August 11-12, the Sultan’s authority
had been fully restored in the affected areas, the rebel leaders were in flight, and a number of small towns and
villages formerly in rebel hands had been reoccupied by the British and Sultanate forces.”

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Iraq vs. Military Faction of 1958 (conflict id 1620, dyad 750)

Conflict Summary: On July 14, 1958, the King of Iraq and his government were overthrown in a military
coup d’etat. A “Republican Government” was immediately formed by the coup plotters which included a
broad spectrum of political parties. The coup d’etat was swift and encountered no resistance from members
of the military.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

While the coup d’etat was led by the military, it was directly affiliated with nationalist political figures in the
country, as evidenced by their participation in the government formed immediately after.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much stronger

It is not clear how many soldiers and officers participated in the coup d’etat. However, the coup plotters
encountered virtually no resistance from the military and were able to quickly overthrow the government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Iraq vs. Military Faction of 1963 (conflict id 1620, dyad 750)

Conflict Summary: In 1963, the government of Iraq was ruled by the Baathist Party, an international party
which also controlled the Syrian government and was dedicated to promoting Arab unity.
The Baathist party was divided into factions, primarily between moderate Batthists, who preferred Arab unity,
and extreme Baathists who believed that radical economic transformation should take precedence before
unity. By November, 1963, the Iraqi government was polarized by the division between these elements. On
November 18, 1963, a coup d’etat led by the President’s brother and allegedly supported by the President
overthrow the existing government and replaced it with a government made up of moderate Baathists and
military officers.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the new government formed by the coup plotters included moderate Baathists, it appears that the
coup was primarily a reaction against governmental deadlock rather than being directly affiliated with the
moderate Baathist elements.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the coup plotters.
However, it is clear that the majority of the military supported, or at least did not oppose, the coup.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Iraq vs. Nationlists (conflict id 1620, dyad 760)

Conflict Summary: On March 7, 1959, the army garrison at Mosul mutinied and declared itself the legitimate
government of Iraq. The attempted coup d’etat was based on dissatisfaction with the perceived left-wing
policies of the current government. The coup attempt was unsuccessful, the leader of the coup, Colonel
Abdul Wahab al-Sharawaf was killed on March 9 and loyal army troops entered and captured the garrison the
next day.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The military officers at Mosul received some support from local tribesmen (as well as external support from
Syria) but do not seem to have been affiliated with a specific Iraqi political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the garrison at
Mosul. However, it is clear that the group that mutineed was no match for the Iraqi government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Iraq vs. SAIRI (conflict id 1620, dyad 770)

Conflict Summary: In the 1980s and 1990s, the secularist Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was
challenged by a variety of Shi’i groups who were dedicated to overthrowing his regime and replacing it with
an Islamist government. Many of these groups fought under the banner of an umbrella organization, the
Supreme Assembly for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SAIRI). The leadership of SAIRI was based in Iran
and received much support from the Iranian government. The conflict between SAIRI and the Iraqi
government continued at a low-level during the 1980s but following the government’s defeat in the Persian
Gulf War of 1991, SAIRI stepped up attacks against the regime. The Hussein regime provded resilient,
however, and SAIRI was unsuccessful in its attempts to take power. The conflict continued at a moderate
intensity through 1996, and sporadic fighting between the government and SAIRI occurred leading up to
Saddam Hussein’s removal by the United States in 2003.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

SAIRI was a coalition of Shi’i Islamist group opposed to the Hussein regime based in Iran and did not
represent a single political organization.

Rebestimate: 4,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 8,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of SAIRI: In 1991:
4,000-8,000; in 1992, 1993, 1994 and 1995: 2,000-4,000; in 1996: 4,000. These estimates are in comparison to
over 300,000 troops possessed by the Iraqi army.

Centcont: no

SAIRI was an umbrella organization and was made up of several factions.

Newstartdate: 3/4/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the best estimate for when this conflict reached 25 battledeaths is
March 4, 1991.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

Conflict: Lebanon vs. Independent Nasserite Movement/Mouribiton Militia (conflict id 1630, dyad 780)

Conflict Summary: In May 1958, a major insurrection broke out in Lebanon against the government. While
there were several different factions involved in the fighting, in general the conflict arose out of
dissatisfaction with the pro-Western policies of the current government. The conflict quickly spread
throughout much of the countryside and much of Lebanon was in a state of civil war through the end of July.
In July, the United States landed 10,000 marines in the country, and new elections were held. A new President
was elected and a coalition cabinet was formed which included many of the opposition leaders, and the civil
war ended.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The leaders of the insurrection were opposed to the pro-Western policies of the Lebanese government;
however, it does not appear that they were affiliated with any specific political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the rebels.
However, they were able to quickly seize large areas of territory and the imposition of a United States military
force was needed to end the conflict.

Centcont: no

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives that the insurrection had three different leaders who commanded the
forces in various areas of Lebanon.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

Conflict: Lebanese Civil War (conflict id 1630, dyad 790)

Conflict Summary: Lebanon achieved independence in 1946 and became one of the few democracies in the
Middle East. However, this democracy was based on a political system that involved power-sharing between
the country’s Christian and Muslim populations. However, the nature of the agreement granted greater power
to the Christian community. This division was based on a conception that Christians were a majority in
Lebanon in the 1940s which may have been true; however, higher birthrates among Muslim Lebanese meant
that by the 1970s the Christians were a minority but still had the most political power in the country. This
political arrangement led to dissatisfaction among Lebanese Muslims. Additionally, the presence of
approximately 400,000 Palestinian refugees, including some groups engaged in violent conflict with the state
of Israel, led to tensions between Lebanon’s Christian and Muslim populations.

In 1975, intercommunal violence broke out between Christian and Muslim groups. This violence

quickly led to full-scale civil war with a set of Muslim organizations broadly organized into the Lebanese
National Movement challenging the Christian-dominated government. Conflict continued for a year and a
half and was incredibly costly, wreaking devastation on Beirut and other parts of Lebanon. In 1976, Syria,
which felt its interests threatened by the civil war intervened and attacked the Lebanese National Movement.
Initially, the intervention was unsuccessful, however, by August the Syrian army had dealt a major blow to the
National Movement. An Arab Peace Conference in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in October 1976 produced a peace
agreement that, while it did not address any of the underlying causes of the war, led to a (temporary) cessation
of violence targeted at the Lebanese state.

Intercommunal violence continued in Lebanon for the next six years. In 1982, however, conflict

resumed between the government and the Lebanese National Movement. Additionally, the Lebanese
government also came into conflict with a large number of Christian groups who were loosely organized into
the Lebanese Front.

In the late 1980s, the already complex situation in Lebanon became more complex when a

constitutional breakdown led to the country having two governments. One was led by a Christian General,
Michael Auon, and he had the support of most of the army. The other government was led by a Sunni
Muslim, Selim Hoss and was generally granted international recognition as the government of Lebanon. The
Lebanese Army fought against the Hoss-led government on behalf of Auon and so in the late 1980s there
were three main groups fighting against the Lebanese government: the Lebanese National Movement, the
Lebanese Front and the Lebanese Army. In 1989, however, the Lebanese National Movement and Lebanese
Front reached a cease-fire agreement that terminated their participation in the conflict. The Lebanese Army
continued battling the government. In 1990, Syria, who had had a sizable contingent in Lebanon throughout
most of the conflict, attacked and defeated the Lebanese Army and by October that group was no longer
functioning.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Lebanon vs. Lebanese National Movement

This conflict is best split into two periods. The first period covers the initial Lebanese civil war between 1975
and 1976. The second period covers the conflict after it reignited in 1982 until its resolution in 1989.

Period 1: 1975-1976

Rebpolwing: no

The Lebanese National Movement was a loose coalition of Muslim organizations and was not affiliated with a
political organization.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 25,000

Rebesthigh: 45,000
Rebstrength: parity

Lebanon: a country study

reports that the National Movement forces in 1975-1976 were fewer than 30,000 and

that they were sometimes allied with 20,000 Palestinian forces. For that reason, the low estimate is 25,000 and
the high estimate is the 25,000 plus the 20,000 Palestinian forces, with the best estimate being halfway in
between.

Centcont: no

The Lebanese National Movement was only a loose alliance of a broad range of groups and did not have a
central command structure.

Newendate: 10/16/1976

An Arab peace conference was held on October 16, 1976 in Riyadh, Saudia Arabia which produced a peace
agreement.

Period 2: 1982-1989

Rebpolwing: no

The Lebanese National Movement was a loose coalition of Muslim organizations and was not affiliated with a
political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1986, 1987 and 1988, the Lebanese
National Movement had approximately 40,000 troops. This estimate is in comparison to 15,000 troops
possessed by the government.

Newendate: 9/30/1989

In September 1989, the major parties to the conflict signed a peace agreement.

Dyad: Lebanon vs. Lebanese Front

Rebpolwing: no

The Lebanese Front was a loose coalition of Christian organizations and did not represent a political
organization.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: stronger

Lebanon: a country study

estimates that the Lebanese Front had about 30,000 troops. The Stockholm

International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1986, 1987 and 1988 the Christian militias had 40,000
troops total. In comparison, the Lebanese government had 15,000 troops in 1986, 1987 and 1988.

Centcont: no

The Lebanese Front was a loose alliance of Christian militias and did not have a central command structure.

Dyad: Lebanon vs. Lebanese Army

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Lebanese Army was fighting on behalf of Prime Minister Aoun, who led one of the two competing
governments at this time. This government was not recognized by the other government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: stronger

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the Lebanese Army had 20,000 troops in 1989. The
government, in comparison, had 9,000 troops on its side.

Newstartdate: 3/15/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the conflict between the government and the Lebanese Army
first reached 25 battledeaths on March 15, 1989.

Newendate: 10/13/1990

In 1990, Syria attacked the Lebanese Army and defeated it by October.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Onwar.com

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Collelo, Thomas, Ed. (1987).

Lebanon: a country study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

Conflict: Malaysia vs. Communist Party of Malaya (conflict id 1640)

Conflict Summary: When Malaya achieved independence on August 31, 1957, the country had already
experienced a nine year guerilla insurgency led by the Communist Party of Malaya (see conflict id 1310). The
conflict continued for three years after independence. However, by 1957, the government/UK forces had
gained the upper hand and the communist insurgents were on the run. The new government offered an
amnesty to “terrorists” and a number of the communist forces surrendered, hurting the insurgents even
further. By 1960, the communists had been completely defeated and driven into Thailand.

The communist threat subsided for the next fourteen years, however, it did not completely go away.

The Communst Party of Malaya continued to try to build a following and received ideological support from
China, who broadcast anti-Malaysian government messages into the country. In 1974 and 1975, encouraged
by other communist victories in Asia, a strengthened Communist Party of Malaya launched a new set of
attacks. They were unsuccessful in overthrowing the government, however, it became clear that the
communist influence in Malaysia had increased as numerous communist sympathizers were found throughout
the society, including in the Malay population which had previously been anti-communist. The Communist
Party of Malaya continued to launch attacks against the government but the conflict did not generate 25
battledeaths per year any year except for 1981, when the Malaysian government claimed to have killed 63
communist guerillas in the countryside.

Notes on Coding

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first refers to the conflict which was already ongoing at the
time of independence in 1957 and continued until 1960. The second period covers the subsequent conflict in
the mid 1970s and early 1980s.

Period 1: 1957-1960

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Malaya was a political party. However, it was banned in 1948 when the insurrection
broke out.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 600
Rebstrength: much weaker

Turnbull (1989, p. 275), writes that “At the end of the Communist Emergency in Malaya in 1960, the number
of guerrillas had probably dwindled to about 600.”

Period 2: 1974-1975, 1981

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Communist Party of Malaya was a political party. However, it was banned in 1948.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Turnbull (1989, p. 276) writes that in 1975 “the communists probably totaled around 3000 armed men in the
(Malaysian) peninsula and southern Thailand.”

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Jungles of Pahang, Perak and Kelantan
Effterrcont: low

In August 1982, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that the Malaysian government claimed in 1981
that the rebels were only operating in the jungles of Pahang, Perak and Kelantan.

Sources:

•

Turnbull, C. Mary (1989).

A History of Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei

. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

•

Onwar.com

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

Conflict: Laos vs. Neutralists and Pathet Lao (conflict id 1650, dyads 820 and 850)

Conflict Summary: After Laos achieved independence in 1953, the new government attempted to pursue a
strategy of “neutrality” in order to stay out of regional conflicts such as that between North and South
Vietnam. Laos had a small communist movement during the 1950s, but the Laotian Communists, later
refered to as “Pathet Lao,” was not a very large force. However, the United States and some internal Laotian
politicians were worried by the electoral showings of the leftist parties and began to crack down. In 1960, a
military coup brought a new government led by Colonel Kong Le to power dedicated to neutrality, however,
the United States opposed the new government and helped to bring a right-wing anti-communist government
to power. This government faced an armed insurgency from three groups. The Pathet Lao escalated an
insurgency which had begun in the 1950s and established control over parts of the Laotian countryside. The
neutralists of Kong Le also battled the government, although they were marginal in the conflict. Additionally,
North Vietnam, which was dependent on Laotian supply routes in its war with South Vietnam, sent
thousands of troops into the country to support the Pathet Lao and oppose the Laotian government.

Attempted cease-fires and coalition governments in the early 1960s failed and by 1962 Laos was

immersed in full-scale civil war. The Pathet Lao continued to receive support from 10,000 North Vietnamese
troops as it waged war against both the government and the neutralists. The government forces, backed up by
the United States and later Thailand and South Vietnam, was unable to stem the growth of the Pathet Lao
and by 1970, the group had 48,000 troops. By the 1970s, the war had shifted in the Pathet Lao’s favor and a
cease-fire in 1973 only brought a temporary peace as the group rearmed and prepared to take the capital. In
1975, the Pathet Lao marched into the capital and became government of Laos.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Laos, United States, Thailand and South Vietnam vs. Pathet Lao

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Pathet Lao was the military wing of a communist party. However, with the exception of brief periods
when the group participated in coalition government, it was not a legal political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 48,000
Rebstrength: parity

Onwar.com reports that by 1970 the Pathet Lao had 48,000 troops in Laos.

Newendate: 8/23/1975

Onwar.com reports that by August 23, 1975, the Pathet Lao had completely secured control of the capital.

Dyad: Laos, Thailand vs. Neutrals

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Neutralist fighting forces were those of Colonel Kong Le who had been the government of Laos for a
brief period in 1960. The neutrals were not a legal political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the neutrals.
However, it is clear that they were weaker than the government forces.

Dyad: Laos, USA, South Vietnam, Thailand vs. North Vietnam

Rebpolwing: Does Not Apply

North Vietnam was an external state participant in the Laotian conflict and so did not represent a domestic
political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com reports that North Vietnam had about 10,000 troops in Laos throughout the conflict.

Sources:

•

Onwar.com

•

Evans, Grants (2002).

A Short History of Laos: The Land in Between

. New South Wales, Australia: Allen

& Unwin.

Conflict: Laos vs. ULNLF (conflict id 1650, dyad 830)

Conflict Summary: Laos has a long history of conflict over governance between different ethnic groups,
particularly between the Hmong, who live in the highland area of the countries, and those Laotians that live
in the lowland valleys. During the civil war with the Pathet Lao (see conflict id 1850, dyads 820 and 850), the
United States organized many Hmong into irregular forces that attacked the Pathet Lao. In the aftermath of
the Pathet Lao takeover in 1975, some of these Hmong groups continued to operate and challenge the
government. In the 1970s, the government launched an offensive against these groups, the most prominent
of which is the United Lao National Liberation Front (ULNLF). The conflict has continued at a low intensity
to the present, although it has not generated more than 25 battledeaths in a year since 1990.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The ULNLF is a political organization opposed to the Pathet Lao government. It is not a legal participant in
Laotian politics.

Rebestimate: 4,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 1989 the ULNLF had between 1,000 and 10,000 troops and
in 1990 that they had 3,000 troops. These estimates are in comparison to approximately 55,000 troops for the
Laotian government.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of the hill country of Laos
Effterrcont: low

The ULNLF and the other Hmong groups have operated in the hill country of Laos, an area that is largely
isolated from governmental control.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1977

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1977.

Newendate: 12/31/1990

The conflict did not reach 25 battledeaths again after 1990.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

100

Conflict: Portugal vs. Angolan rebels (conflict id 1660)

Conflict Summary: While most European colonial powers granted independence to their African colonies in
the early 1960s, the Portugese held on much longer to their colonies of Mozambique, Guinea-Bissau and
Angola. By holding on longer, they faced a rising tide of African nationalism both within their colonies and in
other parts of the continent. Consequently, Portugal faced anti-colonial wars in all three colonies which cost
the lives of thousands of Angolan troops. The war in Angola was one of the most bloody as the colonial
authority faced a conflict from three separate Angolan groups who received support from many African and
other foreign states.

The conflict broke out in 1961 when the Popular Liberation Movement of Angola (MPLA) and the

Union of Angolan Peoples (UPA) launched attacks targeted at European civilians and at Portugese colonial
offices. The Portugese army was able to quickly restore control to most of the country; however, they were
not able to completely defeat the rebels. In the next year the UPA formed the National Front for the
Liberation of Angola (FNLA) and for the next twelve years the FNLA and MPLA would represent major
threats to the Portugese colonial authority. In the late 1960s, the FNLA and MPLA were joined by a third
rebel group, the Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), a Maoist organization led by Jonas
Savimbi.

The Angolan rebel groups benefited from a large degree of external support. The FNLA was based

in Kinshasa (the capital of neighboring Congo/Zaire) and received a large degree of military support from the
Zairean army. The MPLA, with its Marxist-Leninist stance, received support from Cuban troops.
Additionally, recently independent African states such as Tanzania and Zambia provided bases and financial
support to the Angolan rebels.

In the end, however, it was not the internal insurgency that led directly to the end of Portugese

colonialism in Angola. Rather, the high cost of the various African insurgencies was one factor that led to a
military coup d’etat in Portugal that removed the existing government in 1974. The new government
immediately committed to pulling out of the African colonies and 1975 was set as the time for Angolan
independence. The Angolan parties formed a brief coalition government that was supposed to lead the
country into independence. The government did not last, however, and the anti-colonial groups began
fighting each other, a war that would last for almost three decades (see conflict id 2310).

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Portugal vs. FNLA

Rebpolwing: no

The FNLA was an anti-colonial organization based primarily in Zaire and was not affiliated with a political
organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FNLA.
However, it is clear that the group was no match for the Portugese colonial authority in Angola.

Newendate: 7/31/1974

In July 1974, the new Portugese government signed cease-fire agreements with the Angolan rebel groups and
agreed to pave the wave for independence.

Dyad: Portugal vs. MPLA

101

Rebpolwing: no

The MPLA was a Marxist-Leninist anti-colonial organization that attempted to achieve independence through
armed struggle and not politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the MPLA.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Portugese colonial authority in Angola.

Dyad: Portugal vs. UNITA

Rebpolwing: no

UNITA was a Maoist anti-colonial organization that attempted to achieve independence through armed
struggle, not politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by UNITA.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Portugese colonial authority.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Much of central and southern Angola
Effterrcont: moderate

According to

Angola: A Country Study

, “On the eve of independence, UNITA controlled many of the rich,

food-producing central and southern provinces and was therefore able to regulate the flow of food to the rest
of the country. At the time, it claimed the allegiance of about 40 percent of the population” (p. 33).

Newstartdate: 12/1/1966

The first major military operation undertaken by UNITA was in December 1966.

Dyad: Portugal vs. Zaire

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Zaire was a foreign state intervener in the Angolan anti-colonial conflict and so did not participate in the
domestic political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops Zaire dispatched into Angola.
However, it is clear that the force was weaker than the Portugese colonial authority.

Dyad: Portugal vs. Cuba

Rebpolwing: does not apply

102

Cuba was a foreign state intervener in the Angolan anti-colonial conflict and so did not participate in the
domestic political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops Cuba dispatched into Angola.
However, it is clear that the force was weaker than the Portugese colonial authority.

Sources:

•

Collelo, Thomas (1991).

Angola: a country study

. Washington, DC: Library of Congress.

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

103

Conflict: Burma vs. Shan Groups (conflict id 1670)

Conflict Summary: Myanmar (formerly Burma) has been one of the most conflict-torn countries in the world
in the last 50 years. It has a very ethnically diverse population and the last fifty years have seen conflicts
between various minority groups seeking to achieve greater autonomy within or independence from the state
and the government (see conflict ids 1230, 1240, 1250, 1260 and1560). One of the regions of Burma that has
seen constant conflict with the government for more than forty years is Shan state, whose majority Shan
population is ethnically distinct from the dominant Burmese population.

The Shan region was ruled separately during the British colonial period but was joined with Burma as

Shan State upon independence in 1948. However, a provision was included in the constitution that the state
could hold a referendum for independence in ten years. In the early years after independence, Shan state
experienced spillover from two neighboring conflicts: an internal Burmese conflict between Karen separatists
and the Burmese government and the Chinese civil war. Both Karen insurgents and Chinese nationalist
groups based in Shan state and committed atrocities against the local population. These spillovers, combined
with the Burmese government’s moves to centralize power in the state’s hands, led some Shan youths and
intellectuals to begin clamouring for independence.

When the time came for the referendum, the Burmese government did not give the state the option

to declare independence. In 1958, a Shan group launched an attack against government positions and by 1961
several Shan insurgent groups had emerged, including the Shan State Independence Army (SSIA). In 1964,
the SSIA and three other groups merged to form the Shan State Army (SSA), which would be the most well-
known group battling the government on behalf of the Shan for the next forty years.

As the conflict progressed, a large number of Shan groups formed, many of whom disbanded within

years. This included the Shan State Revolutionary Army (SSRA), a marginal group that formed in 1978 and
was completely defeated in 1980. Additionally, other insurgent groups formed in Shan State to fight for
various causes, including the Palaung State Liberation Organization (PSLO) and the Shan State Nationalities
People’s Liberation Organization (SSNPLO).

Each of these groups expressed a political agenda, generally calling for secession of Shan State.

However, the high level of opium-trafficking in this region of Burma meant that many of the groups could be
more accurately viewed as narco-traffickers than groups with an actual political agenda.

One group that emerged in the 1980s that managed to last for more than a decade and represent a

coherent insurgent was the Mong Tai Army (MTA). The MTA was led by Mon Heng and managed to gain
control of a large amount of Shan territory along the border with Thailand by attacking other Shan insurgent
groups and taking their territory.

In the late 1980s and 1990s, the Myanmar government pursued a dual strategy of escalating the

military conflict and pursuing negotiations. The strategy appears to have worked to some extent, several of
the groups, including MTA signed ceasefire and peace agreements with the government and the level of
conflict in the region has declined. New insurgent groups continued to emerge in the 1990s, including the
Shan United Revolutionary Army (SURA) and the Shan State National Army (SSNA) which merged in 1996
with the existing SSA to become the new SSA.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Government vs. SSIA

Rebpolwing: no

The Shan State Independence Army (SSIA) was a military organization dedicated to achieving independence
for the province and did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: 2,500
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 3,000

104

Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in March 1962 reported that there were about 3,000 Shan insurgents prior
to 1961, but that a government offensive in that year reduced the number to 2,000. It is not clear how many
of these insurgents were in SSIA, since there were other groups active as well.

Newendate: 4/22/1964

Fredholm (1993, p. 159) reports that the SSIA and two other organizations met on April 22, 1964, and
merged to form the Shan State Army.

Dyad: Government vs. SSA

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first describes the period from 1964 to 1970 when the SSA
was first active. The second describes the period from 1997 to the present when the old SSA combined with
two other organizations, the SSNA and and the SURA and re-emerged as an important actor.

Period 1: 1964-1970

Rebpolwing: no

The SSA was a military organization dedicated to secession and did not represent a political opposition.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 8,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Fredholm (1993, p. 158) writes, “In the 1960s, the total armed strength of the various Shan factions was
estimated to be at most 8,000.”

Period 2: 1997-ongoing

Rebpolwing: no

The SSA was a military organization dedicated to secession and did not represent a political opposition.

Rebestimate: 8,000
Rebestlow: 800
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of the SSA: In 1996:
10,000; in 1997: 10,000-15,000; in 1998 and 1999: 8,000; in 2000: 3,000; in 2001: 3,000-10,000; in 2002: 800-
7,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 300,000 troops for the Burmese army.

Dyad: Government vs. SSRA

Rebpolwing: no

The SSRA was an organization based on a breakaway faction from the SSA and was almost completely
marginal in the conflict. It did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 145

105

Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993, p. 204) reports that the SSRA had only 145 troops at the time of their surrender in 1980.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1976

The SSRA was formed in 1976. It is not clear when the dyad reached 25 battledeaths, if it did.

Newendate: 12/31/1980

All of the SSRA forces surrendered to the government under an amnesty in 1980.

Dyad: Government vs. SSNPLO

Rebpolwing: no

The SSNPLO was an organization affiliated with the Burmese Communist Party that promoted the interests
of the Pa-O ethnic group, but did not represent a political organization (the Burmese Communist Party was
an insurgent group).

Rebestimate: 1,250
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Fredholm (1993, p. 122-124) reports that in the late 1960s, the SSNPLO (which he calls the SSNLO) had
2,000 troops, but that by the late 1970s it had 500.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The SSNPLO did have a central command structure; however, it experienced fractionalization across the
course of the conflict.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1967

The SSNPLO was formed in 1967 and began waging an armed campaign sometime around that time, in fact,
the group was most effective during the late 1960s.

Dyad: Burma vs. PSLO

Rebpolwing: no

The PSLO was a group that broke off from the SSA and did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the SSA.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Burmese army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1966

106

According to Fredholm (1993, p. 150), the PSLO was formed in 1966.

Dyad: Government vs. MTA

Rebpolwing: no

The MTA was a military, not a political, organization.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 2,100
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the MTA: In 1993:
2,100-20,000; in 1994: 10,000-20,000; in 1995: 5,000-10,000. These estimates are in comparison to over
200,000 troops for the Burmese army.

Newendate: 1/3/1996

The MTA and the government signed a ceasefire agreement on January 3, 1996.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Fredholm, Michael (1993).

Burma: Ethnicity and Insurgency

. Westport, CT: Praeger.

107

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. Katanga (conflict id 1680)

Conflict Summary: The huge central African country of Congo achieved independence from Belgium in 1960
and almost immediately was immersed in conflict. A confrontation over government in Kinshasa (see conflict
id 1860, dyad 1100) was overshadowed by a conflict over the Katanga region, which seceded from Congo on
July 11, 1960. Katanga was the richest region in the country and seceded in an attempt to keep control over
all its mineral wealth. The subsequent conflict between the Katangese forces (supported by Belgium) and the
Congolese army threatened the security of the entire region and led the international community to intervene.
The United Nations sent an international mission which initially had a mandate to try to separate the
combatants. By the fall of 1961, however, the United Nations had shifted strategy and was dedicated to
forceably ending the secession and ensuring the unity of the Congo. The Katangese forces could not stand up
to the United Nations armies and by 1963, the secession crisis had ended and Katanga was reintegrated into
the Congo.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Moise Tshombe, who led the secession of Katanga, was the leader of the largest political party in the
province. His government was not recognized by the Congolese government, however.

Rebestimate: 13,500
Rebestlow: 12,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: parity

Keesing’s Record of World Events in April 1963 reported that the Katangan forces were estimated to include
between 12,000 and 15,000 troops.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Katanga, except for Balubakat
Effterrcont: moderate

The provincial government of Katanga was the group that led the secession. However, the northern area of
Katanga, Balubakat, seceded from Katanga and reintegrated with Congo shortly after the conflict began.

Newendate: 1/14/1963

On January 14, 1963 the leader of the Katanga secessionists, Moise Tshombe, announced that the secession
had ended.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Meditz, Sandra W. and Tim Merrill Ed. (1993).

Zaire: a country study

. Washington, DC: Library of

Congress.

108

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. Independent Mining State of South Kasai (conflict id 1690)

Conflict Summary: Congo became immersed in overlapping internal conflicts almost immediately following
its independence from Belgium in the summer of 1960. The largest of these conflicts were a governmental
dispute (see conflict id 1860, dyad 1100) and a dispute over the province of Katanga, which seceded on July
11, 1960 (see conflict id 1680). An additional conflict to occur in this period was between the government
and the southeastern Congolese region of Kasai, which declared itself the Independent Mining State of South
Kasai on August 8, 1960. South Kasai produced a huge percentage of the world’s diamonds and the leader of
South Kasai, Albert Kalonji, ran the independent state like a king and used the diamond revenues to enrich
himself and fund limited state services. With the imposition into Congo of a United Nations peacekeeping
force in 1961, however, the conflict turned in favor of the government and by 1963 the province of South
Kasai had been reintegrated into a united Congo.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Throughout the conflict, Albert Kalonji was the leader of South Kasai. His government was not recognized
by the Congolese government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the South Kasai
separatists. However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Congolese army.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Meditz, Sandra W. and Tim Merrill Ed. (1993).

Zaire: a country study

. Washington, DC: Library of

Congress.

109

Conflict: Ethiopia vs.TPLF, OLF, EPDM and EPRP (conflict id 1700)

Conflict Summary: In 1974, the Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie was overthrow in a military coup and his
government was replaced with a Marxist-Leninist dictatorship. Almost immediately, the new regime faced
armed insurgency from groups that called for democracy and self-determination for all Ethiopian ethnic
groups, many of whom, such as the Oromo and Tigray felt that they had been discriminated against under
Haile Selassie and continued to be so under the new dictatorship. The first group to challenge the
government was the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Party (EPRP), a radical leftist party that was
nevertheless opposed to the new Marxist dictatorship. As the conflict continued, another political movement,
the Ethiopian People’s Democratic Movement (EPDM) joined the conflict. Additionally, three ethnic-based
groups, the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF) and the Eritrean
People’s Liberation Front (EPLF) all joined the insurgency (note: the conflict between the government and
the EPLF is treated as a separate conflict because the EPLF was battling for an independent Eritrea, rather
than to change the political system of Ethiopia, see conflict id 1780). In the late 1970s and early 1980s the
government had the upper hand against the insurgents, however by the late 1980s the momentum had
shifted. In 1989 the government offered to conduct bilateral negotiations with the various insurgents, but that
offer was rejected and in 1991, the various groups (now fighting under the banner Ethiopian People’s
Revolutionary Democratic Front—EPRDF) surrounded Addis Ababa. In May 1991, President Mengistu fled
the country and the rebels entered and took the capital.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. TPLF

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The TPLF was a political and military organization dedicated to promoting the interests of the minority
Tigrayan population. When the conflict ended, the TPLF was the dominant party in the coalition government
and has remained so since.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of the TPLF: In 1986 and 1987: 10,000; in 1988 and 1989: 20,000; in 1990: 40,000-50,000. These estimates are
in comparison to the following estimates for the Ethiopian government: in 1986 and 1987: 227,000; in 1988:
300,000; in 1989: 313,000; in 1990: 438,000.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1976

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the TPLF reached 25
battledeaths sometime in 1976, but does not date it more precisely than that.

Newendate: 5/28/1991

The EPRDF, of which the TPLF was a member, entered and took the capital on May 28, 1991.

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. OLF

110

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The OLF was a political and military organization dedicated to promoting the interests of the minority
Tigrayan population. When the conflict ended, the OLF was a participant in the coalition government,
although it withdrew a couple of years later and has since launched an armed struggle against the TPLF-led
government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 7,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates in 1990 and 1991 that the OLF had 7,000
troops. This estimate was in comparison to over 400,000 troops possessed by the Ethiopian army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1974

The Uppsala Conflict Databse reports that the conflict between the government and the OLF probably had
its first battledeath in 1974. No information was available on when the conflict reached 25 battledeaths.

Newendate: 5/28/1991

The EPRDF, of which the OLF was a member, entered and took the capital on May 28, 1991.

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. EPRP

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The EPRP was a radical leftist party that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the EPRP.
However, the group was marginal militarily throughout the conflict.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1977

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the EPRP had its first
battledeath in 1977. No information was available on whether or when the conflict reached 25 battledeaths.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the EPRP did not again
reach 25 battledeaths after 1991.

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. EPDM

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

111

The EPDM was a political movement dedicated to promoting democracy and self-determination for minority
groups that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the EPDM.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Ethiopian army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1980

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first reported use of armed force between the EPRP and the
Ethiopian government occurred sometime during the early 1980s but that it cannot be dated more precisely
than that. It is not clear when, or wheter, 25 battledeaths first occurred in a given year.

Newendate: 5/28/1991

The EPRDF, of which the EPRP was a member, entered and took the capital on May 28, 1991.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Marcus, Harold (2002).

A History of Ethiopia: Updated Edition

. Berkeley: CA: University of California

Press.

112

Conflict: Ethiopia vs. Military Faction of 1961 (conflict id 1700, dyad 950)

Conflict Summary: On December 14, 1961, while Ethiopian Emperor Haile Selaisse was in Brazil, members
of the Imperial Guard and Ethiopian police forces staged a coup d’etat. They arrested members of the
Imperial family, seized government buildings and declared a new government. The Ethiopian army and air
force, however, did not immediately support the coup and over the next two days the coup leaders negotiated
with the military to gain its support. While the negotiations were taking place, however, the military pulled
troops out of the provinces and moved them to the capital and, on December 15, 1961, they attacked the
rebel positions. The coup leaders were quickly driven out of the capital and the Emperor returned to Addis
Ababa on December 17. Fighting continued between loyalist and opposition forces for the next week, but by
December 24, all of their leaders had been defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup was led by members of the Imperial Guard, the force ordered to protect the Emperor and his
family. They did not have any link to any political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the Imperial Guard had about 8,000 troops, but that at the
time of the coup about 2,500 of them were participating in a peacekeeping mission in the Congo. It is not
clear how many of the remaining 5,500 Guard members participated in the coup or how many police officers
joined them.

Mobcap: low

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that, with the exception of some student rallies at the University in
Addis Ababa, there was very little popular support for the coup.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

113

Conflict: Ethiopia vs. Military Faction of 1989 (conflict id 1700, dyad 950).

On May 16, 1989, the armed forces chief of staff Merid Neguise attempted a coup d’etat aimed at removing
President Mengistu. The coup was unsuccessful and was followed by a purge of those in the military
suspected of participating in the coup d’etat. Some reports suggested as many as 480 people were killed in the
months following the coup.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup d’etat was led by members of the military and was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the coup plotters.
However, it is clear that the majority of the military stayed loyal.

Newendate: 12/31/1989

Although the coup attempt was defeated within hours, the purges of the military lasted for a long time after
the coup and so the conflict is dated as ending at the end of 1989.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

114

Conflict: Nepal vs. CPN-M/UPF (conflict id 1720, dyad 960)

Conflict Summary: Through the late 1980s, Nepal was run as a monarchy. However, popular opposition to
the monarch led the royal family to agree to an opening of the political system. In 1990, Nepal transitioned to
a constitutional monarchy and there were high expectations of greater political and economic freedom in the
country. However, the promised political and economic opening was delayed and by the mid 1990s,
opposition to the government had grown. In 1996, an insurgency broke out led by the Communist Party of
Nepal-Maoist/United People’s Front (CPN-M/UPF) against the constitutional monarchy. The CPN-M/UPF
called for the overthrow of the government and the establishment of a communist government. The ensuing
conflict has been quite violent and resulted in over 8,000 casualties since 1996. Despite a few attempts at
negotiations, the conflict was ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The CPN-M/UPF was a political, as well as military, organization. It established parallel administrations in
the parts of the country that it controlled. However, it was not a legal political party.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebstlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the CPN-M/UPF:
In 1996 and 1997: no estimate; in 1998: 2,300-10,000; in 1999: 1,000-10,000; in 2000: 1,000-1,500; in 2001:
4,000-5,000; in 2002: 3,000-4,000; in 2003: less than 15,000. These estimates are in comparison to about
40,000 for the Nepalese army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Nepal
Effterrcont: high

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the CPN-M/UPF has been able to take control of parts of
Nepalese territory and has established parallel governments in the areas that it controls.

Newstartdate: 7/13/1996

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict reached 25 battledeaths on July 13, 1996.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

115

Conflict: Nepal vs. Nepali Congress (conflict id 1720, dyad 970)

Conflict Summary: A constitutional government was established in Nepal in 1959 led by the Nepali Congress
Party, but it was dissolved by the King in 1960. In response, members of the Nepali Congress waged a two-
year armed struggle against the new government established by the King. The Nepali Congress received
support from India and was joined by Nepalese peasants who were opposed to the feudal policies of the
King. In 1962, the Nepali Congress decided to end the insurgency and in 1963 a new government was formed
with the Nepali Congress as one of the participants.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Nepali Congress had been in the government prior to its dissolution in 1960. When the King dissolved
the cabinet in 1960, he made all political parties illegal.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Nepali
Congress. However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the army controlled by the government.

Newstartdate: 12/1/1960

The King dissolved parliament in December 1960.

Newendate: 11/8/1962

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in February 1963 that the Nepali Congress had announced the
suspension of its rebel activities on November 8, 1962.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

116

Conflict: France vs. OAS (conflict id 1730)

Conflict Summary: In 1961 and 1962, an extreme right wing organization known as the Secret Army
Organization (OAS) launched a series of terrorist attacks against French government targets. These attacks
included two unsuccessful attempts to assassinate French President De Gaulle. The French government
cracked down on the group and arrested and tried several of its key leaders and by the end of 1962, the
insurgents had been defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

It does not appear that the OAS was affiliated with any political movement as its activities were condemned
by the parties in the French government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the OAS.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the French government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

117

Conflict: Iraq vs. Kurdish Groups (conflict id 1740)

Conflict Summary: The Kurds make up a majority of the population in northern Iraq. Since the 1960s, the
government of Iraq has faced an insurgency led by Kurdish groups seeking greater autonomy within Iraq.
The two dominant groups throughout the insurgency have been the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and
the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). These groups have battled each other, as well as the Iraqi
government. From the 1960s to the late 1980s the conflict continued at a moderate level of intensity. The
Kurdish insurgents did not represent a real challenge to the Iraqi government, however, and were unable to
project power outside of Kurdistan. During the Persian Gulf War of 1991, however, when an international
coalition led by the United States launched an attack aimed at forcing Iraq to pull out of Kuwait, Kurdish
leaders saw an opportunity to escalate the conflict against a weakened government. The attempt was
unsuccessful, however, and the Kurdish uprising was brutally surpressed. The conflict between the Iraqi
government and the Kurdish groups continued into the mid 1990s but has been dormant since 1996.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Iraq vs. KDP/DPK

The conflict in this dyad is best described in two periods, one covering the period prior to the 1991 Gulf War,
and the second covering the period after the Gulf War.

Period 1: 1961-1990

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The Kurdish Democratic Party was formed as a political party with a military wing dedicated to promoting
greater autonomy of Kurds within Iraq. I could not find a reference to whether the KDP was legal in this
period.

Rebestimate: 30,000
Rebestlow: 15,000
Rebesthigh: 45,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989 and 1990 the KDP had between 15,000 and 45,000
troops. These estimates are in comparison to 1 million troops possessed by the Iraqi army.

Newstartdate: 12/1/1961

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the KDP reached 25
battledeaths in December 1961.

Period 2: 1991-1993

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It is not clear whether the KDP was legal prior to 1992. However, in 1992, an autonomy arrangement was
enacted which allowed Kurdish political groups, including the KDP, to have control over affairs in northern
Iraq.

118

Rebestimate: 40,000
Rebestlow: 15,000
Rebesthigh: 55,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1991, the KDP had between 15,000 and 45,000 troops and
that in 1992 and 1993 it had between 25,000 and 55,000 troops. In the same period, the government was
estimated to have over 300,000 troops.

Newendate: 12/31/1993

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the KDP and the government of Iraq did
not reach 25 battledeaths again after 1993.

Dyad: Government vs. PUK

This conflict is best described in two periods, one covering the phase of the conflict prior to the 1991 Persian
Gulf War and the second covering the period during and after the war.

Period 1: 1974-1990

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The PUK was established as a political and military organization. I could not find a reference to whether the
PUK was legal prior to 1991.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989 and 1990 the PUK had 4,000 troops. This estimate was
in comparison to 1 million troops possessed by the Iraqi army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1976

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the KDP reached 25
battledeaths sometime in 1976, but does not date it more precisely than that.

Period 2: 1991-1996

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It is not clear whether the PUK was legal prior to 1992. However, in 1992 an autonomy agreement was
enacted which allowed Kurdish groups, including the PUK, to have control over affairs in northern Iraq.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 4,000
Rebesthigh: 12,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

120

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. North Kalimantan Liberation Army (conflict id 1760)

Conflict Summary: The Sultanate of Brunei was under British protection prior to the 1960s. In the early
1960s, an agreement was reached between the United Kingdom and the sultan of Brunei for Brunei to enter
into a federation with Malyasia, the country that it shared an island with. A group calling itself the North
Kalimantan Liberation Army launched a revolt against the British authority on December 8, 1962, to oppose
Brunei’s joining the Malyasian Federation. The rebels achieved some initial military success but were unable
to seize the Sultan’s palace and within days had been driven into the countryside. Over the next week the
British army conducted mopping up operations in rural Brunei but by December 20, the rebels had been
defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The North Kalimantan Liberation Army was affiliated with the Brunei People’s Party, an organization which
was made illegal shortly after the rebellion broke out.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Brunei’s
People’s Party. However, it is clear that the group was no match for the British army.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

121

Conflict: Ethiopia vs. Eritrean Rebel Groups (conflict id 1780)

Conflict Summary: Eritrea was an Italian colony prior to World War II and after the war was administered by
the victorious allied powers. In 1950, the United Nations decided that Eritrea would enter into a federation
with neighboring Ethiopia, a move not popular among the Eritrean population. The federation lasted ten
years until in 1960, Ethiopian emperor Haile Selassie ended the federation and made Eritrea another province
within Ethiopia. The next year, an armed struggle broke out between the Eritrean Liberation Front (ELF) and
the Ethiopian government, an insurgency that would last for over 40 years.

The ELF battled the Ethiopian government alone until 1970, when a faction of the ELF broke off

and formed the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (EPLF). While the ELF was a conservative political
organization, the EPLF was a Marxist-organization and was dominated by Christian Eritreans from the
country’s highland regions. In the 1970s, fighting occurred between the ELF and the EPLF, as well as
between each rebel group and the government, but by the late 1970s, the EPLF had emerged as the
predominant rebel group. The ELF continued to be beset by fractionalization and by the 1980s a number of
different factions had emerged.

In 1982, the EPLF forced the ELF out of Eritrea and into neighboring Sudan, and by that point the

EPLF controlled almost all of Eritrea. In the 1980s, the EPLF also gained from alliances with other
Ethiopian rebel groups which had organized to oppose the nationalist/Marxist Ethiopian government of
Mengistu, such as the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) and the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF)
(see conflict id 1700). In 1991, the EPLF/TPLF/OLF alliance overthrew the Ethiopian government, and the
EPLF was granted the right to hold a referendum on the independence of Eritrea. The referendum was
successful and on May 24, 1993, Eritrea declared itself independent.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Government vs. ELF

Rebpolwing: no

The ELF was a secessionist movement and did not represent a political opposition.

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

In December 1978, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that the largest faction of the ELF had
between 10,000 and 15,000 troops.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Much of Eritrea
Effterrcont: moderate

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that throughout much of the conflict, the ELF and EPLF controlled
a large percentage of Eritrea.

Newendate: 12/31/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the EPLF drove the ELF out of Eritrea in 1982 and became the
only group fighting the Ethiopian government in Eritrea.

Dyad: Government vs. ELF factions

122

Rebpolwing: no

The ELF factions were various secessionist movements and did not represent political oppositions.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ELF factions.
However, it is clear that the groups were considerably weaker than the Ethiopian government.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1970

It is not clear exactly when the ELF factions broke off. However, the EPLF broke off in 1970 and it was the
major faction, so the start date for these groups is marked as the beginning of 1970.

Newendate: 12/31/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the EPLF drove the ELF out of Eritrean in 1982 and became the
only group fighting the Ethiopian government in Eritrea.

Dyad: Government vs. EPLF

Rebpolwing: no

The EPLF was a secessionist organization. Although it did establish some parallel governmental structures in
the areas of Eritrea it controlled, it was only a military, not a political, opposition.

Rebestimate: 30,000
Rebestlow: 25,000
Rebesthigh: 60,000
Rebstrength: weaker

In December, 1978, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that the EPLF had between 25,000 and
30,000 troops at its command. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following
estimates for the troop strength of the EPLF: In 1986, 1987, 1988 and 1989: 30,000; in 1990: 40,000-50,000;
in 1991: 60,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 200,000 troops possessed by the Ethiopian
government.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The EPLF had a strong central command structure which was easily transferred into a national government
in Eritrea once it achieved independence.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1972

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government of Ethiopia and the EPLF
reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1972 but does not give more specific information than that.

Newendate: 5/28/1991

123

On May 28, 1991, several other Ethiopian rebel groups led by the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (TPLF)
entered Addis Ababa and overthrew the government. The TPLF and EPLF had already reached an
agreement that would allow for a referendum on the independence of Eritrea once the TPLF took power,
and the referendum was held. Therefore, the conflict between the TPLF and the government of Ethiopia
ended on May 28, 1991.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Databse

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Pool, David (2001).

From Guerillas to Government: The Eritrean People’s Liberation Front

. Oxford, UK:

James Currey.

124

Conflict: Venezuela vs. Military Faction of 1962 (conflict id 1800)

Conflict Summary: In 1962, Venezuela experienced two revolts by Marines with a leftist political orientation.
The second insurrection, which broke out in the town of Puerto Cabello on June 3, resulted in over 100
deaths. The Puerto Cabello revolt was led by Lieutenant Commander Pedro Silva and involved about 400
marines. The government forces were able to quickly repress the revolt, however, the fighting was very
bloody and 120 government soldiers lost their lives.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The rebels were a faction of the military with a leftist political orientation, however, it does not appear that
they were affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 400
Rebstrength: much weaker

The New York Times on June 3, 1962, reported that, “The rebel marines were believed to number about
400.”

Source:

•

New York Times

125

Conflict: Venezuela vs. Military Faction of 1992 (conflict id 1800)

Conflict Summary: In 1992, Venezuela was in a highly unstable position. The economy was in bad shape and
the economic austerity policies implemented by President Carlos Andrés Pérez were very unpopular. The
country experienced high levels of strikes and violent protests and in 1992, a faction of the military led by
Hugo Chávez Frías twice attempted to take power through a coup d’etat. First, on February 4, 1992, a group
of officers tried to seize the main government offices but were thwarted when the bulk of the military stayed
loyal to Pérez. Chávez Frías was thrown in jail for plotting the coup, but while he was in jail other supporters
tried again on November 27, 1992. Although they were again unsuccessful in overthrowing Pérez, they were
able to take control of several radio stations and so broadcast their anti-Pérez message. This message proved
quite popular and in elections in 1998, Hugo Chávez Frías was elected president of Venezuela.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The army officers were opposed to the government of Pérez but did not appear to be affiliated with another
political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,100
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that 1,100 military personnel were arrested following the two coup
attempts, which suggests that at least that number were involved.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

126

Conflict: Portugal vs. PAIGC (conflict id 1820)

Conflict Summary: Most African colonies achieved independence in the early 1960s. However, Portugal held
onto its colonies of Mozambique, Angola and Guinea-Bissau much longer. In each, the colonial power faced
large-scale guerilla insurgencies aimed at forcing it out. In the small West African colonial of Guinea-Bissau
the conflict was initiated by the African Party for the Independence of Guinea-Bissau and Cape Verde), a
political organization which formed in the 1950s. The conflict heated up in the 1960s, and by 1970 the group
had 10,000 troops challenging a Portugese army that was also involved in conflicts in Mozambique and
Angola. In 1973, the PAIGC declared Portugese Guinea (as the area was known in the colonial period) the
independent state of Guinea-Bissau and created a government, although it was not recognized by the colonial
power. In 1974, a military coup in Portugal led to a new government that was eager to pull out of the
increasingly costly overseas possessions. Portugal granted the colony independence in September 1974.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The PAIGC was a political and military organization dedicated to achieving independence for the colony. It
was not legal within the Portugese colonial authority.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

In August 1970, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that the PAIGC had 10,000 men engaged in
the fighting. It went on to report that Portugal had about 25,000 soldiers and these were backed up by about
25,000 irregulars that were recruited against segments of the local population opposed to independence.

Mobcap: high

In August 1970, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that the PAIGC “enjoyed the support of all the
tribes except the Fula, whose Moslem chiefs considered independence to be a threat to their traditional
suzerainty.”

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Encyclopedia.com

127

Conflict: Malaysia vs. CCO (conflict id 1830)

Conflict Summary: Malyasia, which became an independent federation in 1963, faced armed insurgency
almost immediately following its creation. Upon independence, the government already faced an armed
challenge by a Communist group, the Clandestine Communist Organization (CCO) based in the Malaysian
province of North Borneo. The CCO was affiliated with the Malaysian Communist Party and received
support from China and from Indonesia, who wanted to destabilize Malaysia. The CCO was small, however,
and was unable to accomplish much militarily, and the conflict ended in 1966 when Indonesia agreed to stop
providing support to Malaysian rebels. Without its external support, the CCO was not viable.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The CCO was affiliated with the Malaysian Communist Party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the CCO.
However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Malyasian army and was unable to
function in the absence of foreign support.

Sources:

•

Onwar.com

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

128

Conflict: Sudan vs. Anya Nya (conflict id 1850, dyad 1060)

Conflict Summary: Sudan is the largest country in Africa, and is divided between the northern part of the
country, which has a population that is primarily Islamic and Arabic, and the southern part whose population
is primarily Animist or Christian and African. In 1956, Sudan achieved independence from British and
Egyptian colonial occupation and tensions between northern and southern Sudanese politicians were already
high. The southern part of Sudan was disadvantaged economically, politically, and socially relative to the
north and prior to independence, northern Sudanese politicians had agreed to consider federalism for the
country. However, upon independence Sudan was a unitary state with a parliamentary government that was
dominated by northerners. The first instance of violence occurred prior to independence in 1955 in southern
Sudan, however, the first seven years after independence were largely peaceful.

By 1963, however, a substantial number of southern Sudanese had committed to armed struggle and

an insurgency broke out. There were several different groups wagining war against the government but the
largest and most important was the Anya Nya. It was not clear exactly what the demands of the Anya Nya
were, they ranged from greater autonomy to secession and creation of a new state, and the conflict raged for
nine years. In 1971, a military coup (the third in two years) brought a government to power that was
committed to ending the armed struggle and a substantial peace agreement was reached between the
government and the rebels. The agreement called for federalism, power-sharing in the military, and would
produce a peace that would last for eleven years until a new, more bloody civil war, broke out (see conflict id
1850, dyad 1080).

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The southern Sudanese rebels created a parallel government in southern Sudan and the Anya Nya was
affiliated with a political movement there. However, the government was not recognized by the Sudanese
national government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 12,000
Rebstrength: parity

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in March 1972 that at the time of the signing of the peace
agreement, Anya Nya was estimated to have 12,000 troops and the Sudanese army southern command was
estimated at 15,000.

Centcont: no

In December 1970, Keesing’s Record of World Events wrote, “Among the rebels there was neither a unified
command nor co-ordinated political leadership.”

Newendate: 2/28/1972

On February 28, 1972, the Sudanese government and Anya Nya signed a peace agreement which ended the
conflict.

Sources:

•

Woodward, Peter (1995). “Sudan: War Without End” in Furley, Oliver, Ed.,

Conflict in Africa

. New

York: I.B. Tauris Publishers.

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

129

Conflict: Sudan vs. SPLM, faction of SPLM and NDA (conflict id 1850, dyad 1080)

Conflict Summary: Sudan has experienced two very violent civil wars in its independent history. The first,
lasting from 1963-1972, involved fighting between a southern secessionist movement (Anya Nya) and a
northern government that was dedicated to keeping the country intact (see conflict id 1850, dyad 1060). A
peace agreement in 1972 terminated that conflict and Sudan was at peace for eleven years. In 1983, however,
a new conflict erupted, again between a rebel group representing southern Sudan and the government.
However, unlike Anya Nya, the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), led by John Garang, set as
its goals the formation of a unified, democratic Sudan, with religious freedom, rather than the secession of
the south.

From 1983 into the 1990s a very bloody civil war was waged in southern Sudan between the SPLM

and the government. Although many battles occurred, neither side was able to make much progress and
neither was close to achieving military victory. In the 1990s, the conflict became more complex, as a faction
of the SPLM dedicated to southern secession split off and became the Southern Sudan Independence
Movement (SSIM). Additionally, another group, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), emerged which
was made up primarily of northern opposition parties. The SPLM joined with the NDA in its attempt to
overthrow the Islamist government.

Throughout much of the conflict, the SPLM received support from the government in neighboring

Uganda. In retaliation, the Sudanese government supported Ugandan opposition groups such as the Lord’s
Resistance Army (LRA). However, an agreement between the Sudanese and Ugandan governments in 2002
led to the loss of Ugandan support for the SPLM, which severely hurt the rebel group’s position relative to
the government. The early years of the 21

century saw several rounds of negotiations between the

government and the SPLM, however, the conflict was ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Government vs. SPLM

This conflict is best treated in two periods. The first covers the period from 1983 to 1994, before the SPLM
joined with the NDA. The second covers the period of the conflict beginning in 1995 which is still ongoing,
when the SPLM fought alongside the NDA.

Period 1: 1983-1994

Rebpolwing: no

The SPLM was formed by southern military officers who did not want to submit to northern command of
the army. It was dedicated to the formation of a unified, democratic Sudan. However, it does not appear that
the group was affiliated with a political movement in the early years of the conflict.

Rebestimate: 30,000
Rebestlow: 20,000
Rebesthigh: 55,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the SPLM: In 1986 and 1987: 20,000; in 1988 and 1989: 30,000; in 1990: 55,000; in 1991, 1992 and 1993: no
estimate; in 1994: 30,000-50,000. These estimates are in comparison to the following estimates for the
Sudanese government in this period: In 1986: 56,750; in 1987 and 1988: 57,000; in 1989: 65,000; in 1990:
75,700; in 1991: 65,000; in 1992: 82,500; in 1993 and 1994: 81,000.

Centcont: yes

130

Strengthcent: moderate

The SPLM has, throughout the conflict, had a strong command structure led by John Garang. However, the
group has also experienced a fair degree of fractionalization, since many of the members of SPLM did not
agree with the group’s call for a unified Sudan and instead wanted secession for the south.

Newstartdate: 5/17/1983

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the SPLM and the government reached 25
battledeaths on May 17, 1983.

Period 2: 1995 to ongoing

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Since 1995, the SPLM has been fighting alongside the NDA, a group made up of northern opposition parties.
These opposition parties are illegal.

Rebestimate: 40,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates that in 1995 and 1996, the SPLM
had 30,000 to 50,000 troops. After 1996, SIPRI only gives estimates for the National Democratic Alliance,
which included the SPLM. Throughout this period, SIPRI estimated the Sudanese government had around
100,000 troops.

Dyad: Sudan vs. Faction of SPLM/SSIM

Rebpolwing: no

The Southern Sudanese Independence Movement (SSIM) was a faction of the SPLM that was opposed to the
SPLM’s call for a unified Sudan. However, the group was not affiliated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that broke off from the SPLM
and joined the SSIM. However, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the government.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the faction of the SPLM and the Sudanese
government reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1991 but did not date it more precisely than that.

Newendate: 4/21/1997

On April 21, 1997, the government of Sudan and the SSIM signed a peace agreement which ended the armed
conflict. The conflict had been largely inactive for five years prior to that and may have ended due to low
activity in 1992.

131

Dyad: Sudan vs. NDA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The National Democratic Alliance was an alliance of opposition groups, including northern opposition
parties. Political parties were illegal in Sudan during this period.

Rebestimate, rebestlow rebesthigh: 2,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the vast majority of the troops under the command of the
National Democratic Alliance were possessed by the SPLM, which is treated here as a separate group.
However, the Database reports that two other groups in the NDA, the Sudan Alliance Forces and Beja
Congress had about 2,500 troops between them, so that number is treated as the troop strength of the NDA.
This force is considerably weaker than the around 100,000 troops possessed by the Sudanese government.

Mobcap: low
Armsproc: low
Fightcap: low

The vast majority of the military force represented by the NDA was controlled by the SPLM, which is treated
as a separate group.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1996

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Sudanese government and the NDA
first reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1996.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

132

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. AFDL, Rwanda and Angola (conflict id 1860, dyad 1090)

Conflict Summary: The conflict which began in Zaire (later the Democratic Republic of the Congo) in 1996
was a complex mix of internal conflict and interstate war. The conflict was incredibly complex but primarily
grew out of lingering consequences of the Rwandan genocide of 1994. In the aftermath of that genocide, as
the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) army was winning and taking control of the country, over a million
Hutu refugees fled Rwanda, many into neighboring Zaire. These refugees included the main planners and
perpetrators of the genocide—the Interahamwe and the ex-Rwandan Armed Forces (ex-FAR). Ex-
FAR/Interahamwe used the refugee camps in Eastern Zaire to launch attacks back into Rwanda and also
coordinated attacks against Congolese Tutsi (the Banyamulenge).
The RPF-led Rwandan government and the Banyamulenge began increasingly frustrated with the
unwillingness of the international community to do anything to stop the attacks and decided to take matters
into their own hands. They organized a Zairean military, the Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation
of Congo-Zaire (AFDL), and in October 1996 the AFDL, along with the Rwandan army, attacked the refugee
camps. Hundreds of thousands of Rwandan refugees went back into Rwanda, while hundreds of thousands
others went deeper into Zaire. The AFDL/Rwandan alliance (along with Uganda) began pursuing the
refugees across Zaire and met little to no resistance from the Zairean army as they did so. This military
success prompted them to widen their objectives beyond merely defeating ex-FAR/Interahamwe and to try
to remove Zairean president Mobutu Seso Seke, who had ruled the country since the mid-1960s from power.
Mobutu had been a long-time supporter of the Rwandan Hutu and had allowed the perpetrators of the
genocide to organize on Zairean territory.

As the Rwandan/AFDL alliance marched toward Kinshasa, they were joined by Angola, a long-time

enemy of Mobutu’s. Angola was upset over Zairean support to the Angolan rebel group Union for the Total
Independence of Angola (see conflict id 2310).

Angola, Rwanda, and the AFDL were able to march to Kinshasa with very little resistance from a

Zairean army that was underarmed, unprofessional, and had been unpaid for years. In May 1997, the alliance
took Kinshasa, a new government was established with Laurent Kabila as President, backed by a large
contingent of Rwandan, Ugandan, and Angolan troops. Kabila changed the name of the country to the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. Peace would prove elusive, however, as the alliance between Kabila and
Rwanda and Uganda would last barely a year, and a subsequent civil war which caused the death of over 3
million Congolese would break out (see conflict id 1860, dyad 1130).

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Congo/Zaire vs. AFDL

Rebpolwing: no

The AFDL was an organization formed by the Rwandan government and Banyamulenge militias in the Kivus
region of Eastern Zaire and did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 20,000
Rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1997, the AFDL had between 20,000
and 40,000 troops. The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the whole alliance had at most 40,000 troops
and since the Rwandan army reportedly had 20,000 troops in Zaire, the estimate for the AFDL is placed at
20,000. The Zairean army had 28,000 troops.

Terrcont: yes

133

Terrname: Much of Eastern Zaire
Effterrcont: moderate

As the AFDL/Rwandan alliance marched on Kinshasa, they were able to take control of many key towns in
Eastern Zaire. Kabila even signed international mining contracts for the resource-rich towns before he
became President.

Newstartdate: 10/18/1996

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths on October 18, 1996

Newendate: 5/17/1997

On May 17, 1997, the AFDL/Rwanda/Angola alliance took power in Kinshasa.

Dyad: Congo/Zaire vs. Rwanda

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Rwanda was an external state participant in the Zairean conflict and so did not represent a political
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database writes that the Rwandan army was reported to have 20,000 troops in Zaire.
The Zairean army had 28,000 troops.

Dyad: Congo/Zaire vs. Angola

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Angola was an external state participant in the Zairean conflict and so did not represent a political
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that Angola sent 2,000 troops to help the AFDL/Rwandan alliance
overthrow Mobutu.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

134

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. CNL (conflict id 1860, dyad 1100)

Conflict Summary: The Congo achieved independence from Belgian in 1960. However, the first five years of
the country’s independent history were incredibly tumultuous. Congo is the second-largest country in Africa
and has over 200 ethnic groups. Within two weeks after independence, the country was immersed in civil war
when the resource-rich region of Katanga seceded (see conflict id 1680). Additionally, the country
experienced political turmoil as the country’s first prime minister, Patrice Lumumba, was dismissed after less
than nine months over divisions with the President and in 1961 was assassinated.

Lumumba was popular in much of the country, particularly in the Eastern Congo, and his dismissal

and assassination increased the grievance of Eastern Congolese with the national government. In 1964,
another civil war broke out, this one over government rather than territory, when former supporters of
Lumumba formed the National Liberation Committee (CNL) and seized control of much of Eastern Congo.
The armed conflict and political turmoil continued until in November, 1965, Lieutenant General Mobutu
Seso Seke seized power in a coup d’etat and declared himself President for 5 years. Mobutu hired white
mercenaries and used them to help defeat the CNL and started an administration that would rule over Congo
(which he would subsequently re-name Zaire) for over 30 years.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Regpolwinglegal: no

The CNL was made up of supporters of former Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the CNL.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Congolese army, even though the Congolese army
was one of the least professional in all of Africa.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Lefever, Erest W. (1965).

Crisis in the Congo: A United Nations Force in Action

. Washington, DC: The

Brookings Institution.

135

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. FLNC (conflict id 1860, dyad 1110)

Conflict Summary: Mobutu Seso Seke seized power in Congo in a coup d’etat in 1965 and remained the
leader of the country (later named Zaire) until 1997. The first twelve years of his reign were largely peaceful,
however, in 1977-1978 he faced a major insurrection led by militants in the Shaba province of Zaire (formerly
Katanga). Katanga was a region of Zaire that had attempted to secede after independence (see conflict id
1680) and the highest level of anti-Mobutu feeling in Zaire was based in Shaba/Katanga. In 1977, the
Congolese National Liberation Front (FLNC), an anti-Mobutu organization formed in Angola, invaded Shaba
from Angola and tried to seize control of the copper-mining areas. The rebels were beaten back. However, in
May 1978, the FLNC attacked again and seized control of large parts of Shaba, before they were defeated by
the Zairean army, supported by Belgian paratroopers and other African armies. By the end of 1978, the
FLNC-led rebellion had been defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The FLNC was an anti-Mobutu organization formed in Angola and did not represent a domestic political
opposition.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in August 1978 that the FLNC led force invading Shaba in May
1978 had about 4,000 troops. This number was considerably smaller than the Zairean army; however, the
Zairean army was notoriously unprofessional and ill-suited to armed conflict.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Shaba Province
Effterrcont: moderate

The FLNC rebels were able to seize control of parts of Shaba province in their two invasions. However, they
were not able to hold onto the territory for long.

Newendate: 12/31/1978

It is not clear exactly when the conflict between the government and the FLNC ended and so it is dated at
the end of 1978

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

136

Conflict: Congo/Zaire vs. Opposition Militias (conflict id 1860, dyad 1120)

Conflict Summary: Mobutu Seso Seke seized power in Congo in 1965 after a bloody five-year civil war. He
would remain as leader for over 30 years. The first 12 years of his reign were generally stable; however, in
1967 he faced a small insurgency in Katanga province. Katanga was a region of Congo that had attempted to
secede after independence (see conflict id 1680) and was a region with a high level of anti-Mobutu sentiment.
The insurrection was led by militias that were organized by Katangese refugees living abroad and they
attempted to take control of key cities such as Bukavu and Kisangani. The rebels were defeated by the
Congolese army, which was supported by private mercenaries hired by Mobutu, and the rebellion was quickly
defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The militias were presumed to have some connection to, or at least be supporters of former Prime Minister
Tshombe, who was overthrown by Mobutu in 1965. All political parties were illegal in Congo at this point.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the opposition
militias. However, it is clear that the Congolese army was stronger than the militias, particularly when it was
supplemented by hired mercenaries.

Centcont: unclear
Strengthcent: unclear

Very little information was available about the leadership of these militias so it is difficult to say much about
them.

Newendate: 7/31/1967

It is not clear when exactly the fighting stopped in this conflict. However, it does appear that it had largely
died down by the end of the month.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

137

Conflict: Congo/Zaire, Zimbabwe, Angola, Namibia, Chad vs. RCD, MLC, Rwanda and Uganda (conflict id
1860, dyad 1130)

Conflict Summary: In May 1997, an alliance between the Congolese group Alliance of Democratic Forces for
the Liberation of Congo-Zaire (AFDL) and the Rwandan and Angolan governments overthrew Zairean
President Mobutu. The leader of the AFDL, Laurent Kabila, became President of the newly-renamed
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and much of his military support was provided by Angola,
Rwanda and Uganda. However, Kabila quickly alienated many of his former supporters—Rwanda and
Uganda as well as a group of Congolese Tutsi generally referred to as Banyamulenge. Kabila was not as quick
to disarm rebel groups based in Congo opposed to Rwanda and Uganda, most importantly the ex-Armed
Forces of Rwanda (ex-FAR)/Interahamwe, the groups who had been primarily responsible for the 1994
genocide. In 1998, only fifteen months after Kabila took power, relations between Rwanda and Kabila hit a
nadir, Kabila kicked the Rwandan troops present in Kinshasa out, and the Rwandans and Banyamulenge
organized a new rebel group in eastern Zaire, the Rally for Congolese Democracy (RCD), with the aim of
removing Kabila from power.

The Rwanda/Uganda/RCD alliance would have quickly overwhelmed the Congolese army and taken

Kinshasa, however, a sizable contingent of Angolan troops intervened to support Kabila. Additionally,
Zimbabwe deployed more than 10,000 troops into Congo, and Namibia and Chad also provided support to
the government. Rwanda and Uganda abandoned their attempts at a quick victory and instead adopted a
strategy of supporting local rebel groups in gaining territory in eastern Zaire and advancing slowly across the
country. At the same time, both countries gained control of areas that controlled key resources and used the
export of those resources to fund the conflict.

In the early years of the war, there was one main domestic insurgent group, the RCD, which received

support from both Rwanda and Uganda. As the conflict wore on, however, the RCD was beset by
fractionalization and two main factions and a series of smaller factions emerged. The cause of the
fractionalization was two-fold. First, there were many internal divisions in a group that had been created
largely to be a domestic face for what was in reality a Rwandan and Ugandan invasion of Congo. Second,
Rwanda and Uganda themselves disagreed over the leadership of the RCD, and a year after the conflict broke
out, they each supported a separate faction.

In late 1998, a second major rebel group emerged, the Movement for the Liberation of the Congo

(MLC) in northeastern Congo. Unlike the RCD, which had basically no popular support and was entirely
reliant on external funding for its existence, the leader of the MLC, Jean Pierre Bemba, was quite popular in
the region of Congo where it operated. The MLC existed as a sort of quasi-government in the Equateur
Province of Congo throughout the conflict, and was able to extract tax revenue from the local population.
The MLC became closely allied with Uganda across the course of the conflict.

By the middle of 1999, the conflict in Congo had reached a stalemate, with the MLC/Uganda alliance

controlling the northeastern part of the country, the Rwanda/RCD alliance controlling eastern and parts of
southern Congo, Zimbabwe based in southern Congo and Kabila, with heavy support from Angola,
controlling the areas around Kinshasa. A peace agreement was signed between the external and internal
parties at Lusaka, Zambia, in mid-1999. The conflict raged at a high-level, however, through the end of 2001.
By the end of 2001, however, the external states had spent so much on their intervention that they began to
pull out of the Congo, and an internal Congolese dialogue began to make progress toward producing a
power-sharing government which would begin in 2002.

As of the end of 2003, the situation in the Congo is one of an absence of large-scale armed conflict,

but it is a tenuous peace at best. The war in the Congo was one of the worst conflicts in the post-World War
II era, leading to an estimated 3 million Congolese deaths through fighting but primarily through disease and
starvation resulting from the complete devastation of the economy and society.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Congo vs. RCD

138

Rebpolwing: no

The RCD was nominally a domestic Congolese opposition group based in the Kivus region of Eastern Zaire.
However, the group was almost completely artificial, and was used primarily by Rwanda to put a Congolese
face on its invasion. It did not represent a coherent political organization.

Rebestimate: 40,000
Rebestlow: 15,000
Rebesthigh: 60,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the RCD: In 1998: 60,000; in 1999: 50,000; in 2001 and 2001: 15,000-20,000. In comparison, the Government
of Congo is estimated to have approximately 50,000 troops, with another 10,000 from Angola, Namibia,
Zimbabwe and Chad.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The RCD did have a central command structure. However, the organization was beset by rampant
fractionalization throughout its participation in the conflict.

Mobcap: low

The RCD was able to rally almost no domestic Congolese support and was entirely dependent on funding
from Rwanda for its existence.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of the Kivu region of Eastern Zaire
Effterrcont: low

The RCD did control some territory in the Kivus, the region of Zaire on the border with Rwanda and
Burundi. However, this control was contested as they battled with local Congolese militias (the Mai-Mai)
opposed to their ties to Rwanda.

Newstartdate: 8/11/1998

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the DRC government and the RCD reached
25 battledeaths on August 11, 1998.

Newendate: 12/31/2001

Despite the presence of a peace agreement signed by all parties in 1999, the conflict continued through 2001.
By the end of 2001 it had largely wound down, however, and the conflict has not reached 25 battledeaths
since.

Dyad: Congo vs. RCD faction (also RCD-Liberation Movement or RCD-ML)

Rebpolwing: no

The RCD-ML was formed as a breakaway faction in 1999 that received support from Uganda, as opposed to
the primary RCD organization that was supported by Rwanda. It did not represent a political organization.

139

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 2,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 2000 and 2001 the RCD-ML had
2,500 troops, as compared to 45,000-55,000 for the Congolese government.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Kisangani
Effterrcont: low

The RCD-ML faction, led by Ernest Wamba dia Wamba, moved to the resource-rich city of Kisangani in
1999 after its split with the overall organization. Kisangani was the cite of three major conflicts between the
Rwandan army and their Congolese proxies and the Ugandan army/RCD-ML.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1999

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the RCD-ML reached
25 battledeaths sometime in 1999 but does not date it more precisely than that.

Dyad: Congo vs. MLC

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The MLC established a quasi-government in the Equateur Province where it was based, and extracted
taxation revenue and provided public goods. This government was not officially recognized by the Congolese
government.

Rebestimate: 12,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the MLC: In 1999 and 2000: 10,000; in 2001: 10,000-15,000. These estimates are in comparison to
approximately 50,000 troops for the Congolese army, plus another 10,000-15,000 troops from foreign armies.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The MLC was a well-organized group with a clear command structure led by Jean-Pierre Bemba.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Equateur Province
Effterrcont: high

The MLC was able to establish a quasi-government in Equatuer Province, and received much of its revenue
from local taxation.

Newstartdate: 11/7/1998

140

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the MLC and the Congolese government
first reached 25 battledeaths on November 7, 1998.

Dyad: Congo vs. Rwanda

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Rwanda was an external state participant in the Congolese conflict and did not represent a domestic political
organization.

Rebestimate: 15,000
Rebestlow: 4,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the number of troops
Rwanda had in Congo: In 1998: 4,000; in 1999, 2000 and 2001: 10,000-20,000. These estimates are in
comparison to approximately 50,000 troops possessed by the Congolese army which was supported by
10,000-15,000 troops from foreign states. The Rwandan army, however, despite its numerical disadvantage,
was much better trained, armed, and organized than the Congolese army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Eastern Zaire
Effterrcont: low

The Rwandan army controlled up to a third of Eastern Zaire. However, rather than develop any kind of
political structure in the regions they controlled, the Rwandan army focused on extracting resources from that
area.

Dyad: Congo vs. Uganda

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Uganda was an external state participant in the Congolese conflict and did not represent a domestic political
organization.

Rebestimate: 9,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the number of
troops Uganda had in Congo: In 1998: 6,000; in 1999: no estimate; in 2000: 10,000-15,000; in 2001: 8,000-
9,000. These estimates are in comparison to approximately 50,000 troops possessed by the Congolese army
which was supported by 10,000-15,000 troops from foreign states.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Ituri Province and parts of northeastern Zaire
Effterrcont: low

142

Conflict: Gabon, France vs. Military Faction (conflict id 1870)

Conflict Summary: Gabon gained independence from France in 1960 and emerged as a multiparty
democracy. The first Prime Minister was Léon Mba, who led the largest party in a multi-party coalition
government in the legislature. Shortly after independence it became clear, however, that Mba was unhappy
having to bargain with other parties and he began pushing for the creation of a post of President that would
be directly elected and be more powerful than the legislature. His attempts to increase his personal power,
along with his close relationship to France, led to some opposition within Gabon and on February 17, 1964, a
group of younger officers led a coup d’etat and arrested Mba. An interim government was established, led by
members of opposition parties, but within twenty-four hours the French military intervened and restored
Mba to power. Fighting continued between French forces and supporters of the coup for a few days but soon
the forces were completely surpressed.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

After the coup d’etat, members of parties opposed to Mba’s moves to increase his personal power created an
interim government. It is not clear whether the people in the government had encouraged the coup d’etat.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops participating in the coup d’etat.
However, it is clear that the coup supporters were substantially weaker than the French army.

Newendate: 2/24/1964

Barnes (1992) writes that within a few days after the coup the fighting had subsided but does not give a clear
end date, so it is listed as having ended one week after the coup attempt.

Source:

•

Barnes, James (1992).

Gabon: Beyond the Colonial Legacy

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

143

Conflict: Portugal vs. FRELIMO (conflict id 1880)

Conflict Summary: While most of the continent of Africa achieved independence in the early 1960s, Portugal
hung onto its three colonies of Angola, Guinea-Bissau and Mozambique into the 1970s. In each, the colonial
power faced an armed insurgency led by African groups struggling for independence (see also conflict ids
1660 and 1820). The insurgency in Mozambique, led by the Mozambique Liberation Front (FRELIMO) was
the last of the three and began in 1964.

The post-World War II period in Africa was one of rising nationalism as the growing educated

African class became to clamour for self-determination. Mozambique was no different, and by the 1950s
there were several movements in Mozambique calling for independence. As other African states gained
independence and insurgencies developed in the other Porguese colonies, these Mozambiquan nationalists
began to increasingly see violence as the way to achieve independence. In the early 1960s, several of these
organizations merged to form FRELIMO, which would be the main challenger to Portugese rule in the
colony. In 1964, an armed insurgency broke out, however, in the early years FRELIMO was not able to
accomplish much as it was hampered by fractionalization and was well overpowered by the Portugese army.
In the late 1960s and the early 1970s, the group gained as it became more coherent and was able to establish
more of a base in parts of northern Mozambique. However, the group was no overmatched and would not
have been able to defeat the Portugese army directly. Rather, Mozambique won independence after a coup
d’etat in Portugal in 1974 brought a new government to power and the new government decided that the
costs of holding onto the colonies was too high, and in 1975 Mozambique, along with Angola and Guinea-
Bissau, achieved independence.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

FRELIMO was an organization established to organize opposition to colonial rule and not to compete within
the existing political system.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com estimates that during the conflict, FRELIMO had 15,000 troops. At the same time, the Portugese
army had 73,000 troops in Mozambique.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

FRELIMO experienced high degrees of fractionalization during the conflict, particularly in the early years.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Northern Mozambique
Effterrcont: low

FRELIMO operated in northern Mozambique for much of the conflict and was able to control some
territory. However, relations between the group and the population of northern Mozambique were strained
because FRELIMO was primarily led by southern Mozambiquans.

Newendate: 10/31/1974

In October, 1974, FRELIMO and the Portugese government signed the Lusaka Agreement which ended the
armed conflict and paved the way for independence in July 1975.

145

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. FLOSY and NLF (conflict id 1890)

Conflict Summary: For much of the last century, Yemen was divided into two: North and South Yemen.
South Yemen, whose seaport of Aden was very important to Arabian trade, was a British colony until the late
1960s. In the early part of that decade, violent opposition to British colonialism increased in what was one of
the least-developed countries in the world. Two major groups emerged as the major ones to challenge British
rule, the National Liberation Front (NLF), a Maoist organization that received primarily indigeneous support,
and the Front for the Liberation of South Yemen (FLOSY), an organization that was backed by Egypt. The
fighting reached the status of a full-scale armed conflict in 1964, and the British decided to grant
independence to South Yemen in 1968. As independence approached, the fighting became increasingly
between Yemenese groups such as the NLF and FLOSY over who would control post-colonial South Yemen
and less between the United Kingdom and these groups. The NLF emerged as the dominant group and on
November 30, 1967, South Yemen became independent as the only Marxist state in the Middle East, with the
NLF in charge.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: United Kingdom vs. NLF

Rebpolwing: no

The NLF was a Maoist anti-colonial insurgent group and did not represent a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the NLF.
However, the group was able to achieve victory because it imposed costs on the United Kingdom that they
were unable to pay, not through military victory.

Mobcap: high

The NLF was primarily able to achieve success by mobilizing indigenous Yemenese.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Rural South Yemen
Effterrcont: moderate

The NLF was able to control parts of the South Yemen countryside, while the British were based almost
exclusively in Aden.

Dyad: United Kingdom vs. FLOSY

Rebpolwing: no

FLOSY was an organization that opposed the British colonial rule militarily, not as a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by FLOSY.
However, the group was overshadowed in the conflict by the NLF.

147

Conflict: Burundi vs. Military Faction (conflict id 1900)

Conflict Summary: On October 18-19, 1965, a group of military and police officers attempted to overthrow
the Burundian government. They were unsuccessful in doing so, although they did assassinate the Prime
Minister, Leopold Biha, in the process. The officers attempted the coup following a long period of unrest in
Burundi over the composition of the government. In recent elections, the ruling Uprona party, which was
primarily Tutsi but did include some Tutsis, had won again, although a predominately Hutu party had won a
sizable majority (in Burundi, the Hutu make up about 84% of the population with the Tutsi making up about
15%). This election result produced a situation in which the parliament was majority Hutu but the
government was majority Tutsi, which led to some dissatisfaction on the part of the Hutu party. This coup
attempt was unsuccessful but the political instability in Burundi continued.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link

The military officers were allied with members of the Hutu-based People’s Party.

Rebestimate: 80
Rebestlow: 40
Rebesthigh: 120
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that between 40 and 120 officers participated in the coup attempt.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

148

Conflict: Burundi vs. Hutu Organizations (conflict id 1900)

Conflict Summary: Burundi is a country with a majority ethnic group, the Hutu, who make up approximately
85% of the population, and a minority group, the Tutsi, who comprise about 14% of the population. In
Burundi, the Tutsi have been dominant politically, socially, and economically since independence in 1962.
Inter-ethnic violence has occurred several times, and since 1990 the country has been embroiled in a large
civil war between various groups promoting Hutu interests and the Tutsi-dominated government. The
conflict has been quite complex because of high levels of fractionalization on both the state and the
government side, which has led to a large number of actors and has made finding a peaceful solution quite
difficult.

The conflict broke out in 1990 when armed Hutu groups that had organized in refugee camps in

neighboring Tanzania and Rwanda began launching attacks into Burundi. The Tutsi-led government of Pierre
Buyoya was highly unstable in the early years of the conflict and faced numerous coup attempts and in 1993
introduced multiparty democracy to try to de-escalate the rising conflict. However, in 1993 and 1994,
subsequent Hutu presidents were killed (the first intentionally, the second in the same plane crash which
killed Rwandan President Juvenal Habyarimana). The Tutsi-dominated military took control of the
government and the conflict restarted and reached a higher level.

Beginning in 1998, the Burundian government took a less hard-line stance and began making steps

toward implementing a power-sharing government. Additionally, the governmet pursued negotiations with
some of the armed combatants. However, the Burundian conflict also became more complex in the late
1990s because it became intertwined with the massive civil war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
(DRC) (see conflict id 1860). In 2001, 2002 and 2003, as the conflict in the DRC began to wind down and as
progress was made at the negotiating table the conflict in Burundi appeared to be inching toward resolution.
However, as of the end of 2003, the power-sharing government was still in armed conflict with two groups:
the National Council for the Defense of Democracy-Forces for the Defense of Democracy (CNDD-FDD)
and the Party for the Liberation of the Hutu People-National Liberation Forces (PALIPEHUTU-FLN).

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Burundi vs. Ubumwe

Rebpolwing: no

Ubumwe was a group that launched an attack from refugees in neighboring Tanzania and then did not
reappear in the conflict, it did not participate in Burundian politics at all.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by Ubumwe.
However, the group was soundly defeated by the Burundian army and clearly was not very substantial.

Newstartdate: 8/13/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the first battledeath occurred on August 13, 1990. However, it
does not give a date for when the conflict reached 25 battledeaths.

Newendate: 12/31/1990

Ubumwe was not heard from again after the end of 1990 and so the conflict is dated at ending at that point.

Dyad: Burundi vs. Palipehutu

149

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

Palipehutu formed as a political organization with a military wing and began launching attacks in 1991.
However, Palipehutu was not recognized as a political organization by the Burundian government in the
period in which it was engaged in armed conflict.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources give any indication as to the number of troops possessed by Palipehutu.
However, the group was clearly weaker than the more professional Tutsi-dominated military.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: moderate

In 1992, Palipehutu split into two factions. However, the leadership of the faction which has remained
Paliphutu was generally pretty strong.

Newstartdate: 11/26/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict reached 25 battledeaths on November 26, 1991.

Newendate: 12/31/1992

In 1992, Palipehutu split into two main factions. One, which continued to be referred to as Palipehutu,
committed itself to struggling for a greater role for Hutu in the government primarily as a political
organization. The other, Palipehutu-FNL committed itself to armed struggle and should properly be treated
as a separate organization.

Dyad: Burundi vs. Palipehutu-FNL

Note: The original PRIO/Uppsala Armed Conflict Database does not have this dyad in it. However, this
group split off from Palipehutu in 1992 and while Palipehutu remained a political organization, Palipehutu-
FNL was a military organization with a separate agenda, and so should be counted as a separate actor.

Rebpolwing: no

Palipehutu-FNL has existed exclusively as a military organization and is separate from the political Palipehutu
organization.

Rebestimate: 2,500
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the strength of
Palipehutu-FNL (which they call Palipehutu): In 1998, 1999 and 2000: 2,000; in 2001: 2,000-3,000; in 2002:
3,000. These estimates are in comparison to 40,000 troops for the Burundian army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1997

150

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Burundi and the Palipehutu-FNL reached
25 battledeaths sometime in 1997, but does not give a more specific estimate.

Dyad: Burundi vs. CNDD

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

CNDD was formed as a political organization and also had a military wing. However, during the period that
CNDD was active in the conflict (before the military wing broke off from the political organization), political
parties were illegal in Burundi.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by CNDD in this
period. However, it is clear that the organization was militarily weaker than the Burundian army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The CNDD has been beset by fractionalization, particularly in its armed wing, since its formation.

Newstartdate: 11/26/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and CNDD first reached 25
battledeaths on November 26, 1994.

Newendate: 5/8/1998

On May 8, 1998, the military wing of the CNDD split off from the political wing and formed a new
organization, the CNDD-FDD. The remaining CNDD largely ceased the armed struggle and primarily
competed as a political organization.

Dyad: Burundi vs. CNDD-FDD

Rebpolwing: no

The CNDD-FDD was the military wing of the CNDD which split off on May 8, 1998, and did not
participate politically.

Rebestimate: 11,000
Rebestlow: 3,000
Rebesthigh: 16,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the CNDD-FDD: In 1998: 3,000-10,000; in 1999: 10,000; in 2000 and 2001: 10,000-16,000; in 2002: 11,000-
12,000. These estimates are in comparison to 40,000 troops for the Burundian army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1999

151

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that this conflict first reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1999. It
does not give any more specific information than that.

Dyad: Burundi vs. Frolina

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Frolina was a political organization with an armed wing that formed based on a break with Palipehutu in
1992. However, the organization was not a legal political organization until after it signed an agreement
ending its participation in the conflict.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by Frolina. However,
it does appear that the group was largely marginal in the conflict.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1997

None of the sources gave any information that would allow for dating the exact start of the dyad in the
conflict. However, it is clear that the group operated during 1997.

Newendate: 12/31/1997

The conflict between Frolina and Burundi did not reach 25 battledeaths after 1997 and in fact in 1998, the
group entered into peace negotiations with the government.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

152

Conflict: Chad vs. Insurgent Groups of 1989- (conflict id 1910)

Conflict Summary: Chad has been immersed in civil war for nearly its entire independent history. This
conflict has been incredibly complex, with a large number of rebel groups opposing subsequent Chadian
governments, and the conflict experienced a high level of external intervention with France and Libya in
particular supporting various factions of the conflict. The conflict broke out primarily over historical
animosities between the north and the south. The population of Chad, like that of many countries in this
region of Africa, is divided between north and south, with the northern population primarily Muslim and
Arabic and the southern population primarily Christian or Animist and African. In the mid 1960s, two main
rebel groups formed to oppose the southern-dominated government, the Front for the National Liberation of
Chad (FRONILAT) formed in the north while the Chad National Front (FNT) formed in the east.

As the conflict has progressed, it has become primarily dominated by conflict among northern

factions representing different ethnic groups or ideological positions. In 1982, a northern rebel group, the
Armed Forces of the North (FAN), which had broken off from FROLINAT, seized power in N’djamena and
since then one northern group or another has controlled the government. The 1980s and 1990s saw several
rebel groups challenging the government of FAN and its successor government, that led by the Patriotic
Salvation Movement (MPS), which seized power in 1990. Additionally, the MPS government has been under
siege from within, facing several attempted coups.

Fighting has continued in Chad throughout the 1990s and into the 21

century despite multiple series

of negotiations and peace agreements. By 2003, it appeared that the conflict had de-escalated because many
of the rebel groups had been defeated or dropped out. However, no lasting comprehensive peace agreement
has been achieved and the issues at stake in the conflict have not been resolved.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Chad vs. Front for the National Liberation of Chad (FROLINAT)

Note: This dyad is not included in the PRIO/Uppsala Armed Conflict Dataset. Rather the conflict from 1965
to 1988 is listed as “Chad vs. Libya and Various Organizations.” However, my research indicates that the
Front for the National Liberation of Chad (FROLINAT) was the main rebel group in this period.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

FROLINAT originally formed as an opposition political party. However, it was based in Algeria, not in Chad.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by FROLINAT.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Chadian army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

There was a central leadership of FROLINAT. However, from its inception the group was beset by high
degrees of fractionalization and many other rebel groups split off from FROLINAT throughout the conflict.

Terrcont: unclear

FROLINAT operated primarily in northern Chad, along the border with Libya. However, none of the
sources indicated whether the group controlled territory in that region.

153

Newendate: unclear

At some point in the 1980s, FROLINAT became so fractionalized that it was no longer a relevant actor. It is
not clear exactly when that happened, however.

Dyad: Chad vs. Armed Forces of the North (FAN)

Rebpolwing: unclear

None of the available sources indicated whether FAN functioned as a political organization prior to its
seizing power in N’djamena in June 1982.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by FAN. However,
the Chadian government was quite weak and was able to fight FAN for as long as it was due to the
intervention of Libya in 1980-1981.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Eastern Chad
Effterrcont: unclear

Onwar.com reports that prior to a Chadian government offensive in 1980, the FAN controlled most
important towns in Eastern Chad. Additionally, the group was able to regain those towns in 1981.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1971

It is not clear exactly when the FAN broke off from FROLINAT and became an independent actor. The first
reference I could find to the group was in 1971, so I dated the dyadic conflict as starting on the first day of
that year.

Newendate: 6/30/1982

In June, 1982, FAN overthrew the existing government and took control and thus became the government
rather than a Side B actor.

Dyad: Chad vs. Libya

Note: Libya has a long history of intervention in the Chadian conflict. Some of this intervention has been on
the side of the government, as in their largest involvement in 1980-1981, but for the most part they have
intervened to oppose the government.

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Libya was an external state intervenor in the Chadian conflict and did not participate in domestic politics.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

154

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks estimated that in 1986 and 1987 Libya had
5,000 troops in Chad opposing the government.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1983

It is not clear exactly how to date Libya’s intervention into the conflict as an opponent of the government.
However, directly prior to the FAN’s seizure of power in N’djamena in June 1982, Libya had backed the
government and so would more properly be viewed as a Side A actor.

Newendate: 12/31/1987

It is not clear exactly when Libya pulled out of the conflict, and in fact the country remained involved to
some degree throughout the 1990s. However, by the end of 1987, the scale of its intervention had decreased.

Dyad: Chad vs. Chad National Front (FNT)

This conflict is best described in two periods, as there were two different groups under the name FNT that
battled the Chadian government. The first fought during the 1960s and into the early 1970s. The second
battled the government beginning in 1992.

Period 1: 1965-1971

Rebpolwing: no

The FNT was a military organization and did not have a political affiliation in this period.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FNT.
However, it is clear that the group was quite small.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Biltine region of east-central Chad
Effterrcont: moderate

Keesing’s Record of World Events in June 1970 reported that the FNT operated primarily in the Biltine
region of east-central Chad.

Newendate: 12/31/1970

It is not clear when the conflict between the FNT and the government ended in this period. However,
Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the group was largely defeated in 1970.

Period 2: 1992-1994

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in May 1993 that at negotiations with the FNT, the government
refused to recognize the rebel group as a political party.

155

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FNT.
However, it does not appear that the group was very significant in the conflict.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the FNT reached 25
battledeaths sometime during 1992, but does not give a more precise estimate.

Newendate: 10/16/1994

The government and FNT signed a cease-fire agreement on October 16, 1994, which effectively ended the
conflict.

Dyad: Chad vs. Military Faction

Rebpolwing: no

The military faction was a group of military officers opposed to the authoritarian tendencies of the
government and was not affiliated with a political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the military
faction. However, the group was not able to accomplish much militarily against the Chadian government.

Newstartdate: 10/20/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the military faction
reached 25 battledeaths on October 20, 1989.

Newendate: 12/31/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that there was no fighting between Chad and the military faction after
1989. However, the military faction merged with another group to become the Patriotic Salvation Movement
(MPS) in 1990, and the conflict between the government and MPS is treated as a separate dyad.

Dyad: Chad vs. Movement for the National Salvation of Chad (MOSANAT)

Rebpolwing: no

MONSANAT was created as a military organization and did not have a link to a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by MOSANAT.
However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Chadian army.

156

Newstartdate: 3/3/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and MOSANAT first
reached 25 battledeaths on March 3, 1989.

Newendate: 12/31/1989

After 1989, MOSANAT merged with some other groups to become the Patriotic Salvation Movement (MPS)
and the conflict between the government and MPS is treated as a separate dyad.

Dyad: Chad vs. Patriotic Salvation Movement (MPS)

Note: This dyad is not in the PRIO/Uppsala Armed Conflict Dataset. It is not clear why not. It was formed
by multiple other organizations in 1990 to overthrow the government and in fact succeeded in doing so.

Rebpolwing: no

Although the MPS was clearly formed with the goal of overthrowing the Chadian government, it does not
appear that they participated as a political organization at the same time.

Rebestimate: 3,750
Rebestlow: 2,500
Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the MPS had between 2,500 and 5,000 troops in 1990, as
compared to 17,000 for the government.

Terrcont: no

Although the MPS did take some towns on its way to the capital, the offensive that brought it to power began
in the Sudan and only lasted 3 weeks, so the group did not effectively control territory for much of the
conflict.

Newstartdate: 3/31/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the MPS first reached
25 battledeaths on March 31, 1990.

Newendate: 12/2/1990

On December 2, 1990, the MPS defeated the army and took over control of Chad.

Dyad: Chad vs. Islamic Legion

Rebpolwing: no

The Islamic Legion was a military organization based primarily in Libya and did not represent a Chadian
political opposition.

Rebestimate: 3,000
Rebestlow: 2,000

157

Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of the Islamic Legion: In 1988: 3,000; in 1989: 2,000-5,000; in 1990: less than 2,000. These estimates are in
comparison to 17,000 troops possessed by the Chadian army.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1988

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Chad and the Islamic Legion first reached
25 battledeaths on December 31, 1988.

Newendate: 12/31/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that after 1990 the conflict between the government and the Islamic
Legion did not again reach 25 battledeaths in a year.

Dyad: Chad vs. Movement for Development and Democracy (MDD)

Rebpolwing: no

The MDD was primarily a military opposition with its leadership based in Libya, it does not appear that it was
affiliated with any political organization.

Rebestimate: 750
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1992, the MDD had between 500 and 1,000 troops. This
estimate is in comparison to approximately 25,000 troops held by the Chadian army at this point.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that this dyadic conflict had reached 25 battledeaths by December 31,
1991

Newendate: 5/20/1998

On May 20, 1998, the MDD decided to end its war against the government.

Dyad: Chad vs. Movement for Democracy and Justice in Chad (MDJT)

Rebpolwing: no

The MDJT was a small group that operated mainly in the mountains and does not appear to have been
affiliated with any political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

158

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the MDJT.
However, they did indicate that the group was really small and was able to persist primarily because it was far
away in the capital and in the mountains.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1999

The Uppsala Conflict Database indicates that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths on December 31,
1999.

Newendate: 12/31/2002

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that after 2002 the conflict between the government and the MDJT
did not reach 25 battledeaths.

Dyad: Chad vs. Armed Forces of the Federal Republic (FARF)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the May 7, 1998 peace agreement that ended the conflict between
the government and the FARF made FARF a legal political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FARF.
However, the group was not very significant militarily.

Newstartdate: 11/30/1997

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the FARF first reached
25 battledeaths on November 30, 1997

Newendate: 5/7/1998

On May 7, 1998, the government and FARF signed a peace agreement which led to FARF ending the armed
struggle and becoming a legal political party.

Dyad: Chad vs. National Council for Recovery (CNR)

Rebpolwing: no

The CNR was an armed organization that was formed by the former Interior Minister in the government
who attempted a coup. It was based primarily outside of Chad and did not represent a domestic political
organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the CNR.
However, it does appear that the group was much weaker than the Chadian government.

159

Newstartdate: 12/31/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the CNR reached 25
battledeaths sometime in 1992, but that an exact date cannot be determined.

Newendate: 12/31/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the last reported armed conflict between the government and the
CNR occurred in 1994.

Dyad: Chad vs. Committee of National Revival for Peace and Democracy (CSNPD)

Rebpolwing: no

The CSNPD was formed by dissatisfied military officers and did not have links to a political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1992 the CSNPD had 5,000 troops as compared to 25,200 for
the Chadian army.

Newstartdate: 8/31/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the CSNPD first
reached 25 battledeaths on August 31, 1992.

Newendate: 8/11/1994

On August 11, 1994, the government and the CSNPD signed a peace agreement which ended the conflict
between the two.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Onwar.com

160

Conflict: Colombia vs. Leftist Organizations (conflict id 1920)

Conflict Summary: Colombia has been the most conflict-torn country of South America in the post-World
War II period. In the 1950s, the country was nearly torn apart by “la violencia,” conflict between supporters
of the two major parties—the liberals and conservatives. In 1958, the two warring parties signed an
agreement to create a power-sharing government for 16 years which would guarantee alternation of the
executive and the sharing of other political powers. This agreement ended la violencia, but paved the way for
further violence as the new government turned its attention the very armed peasant organizations they had
used in their conflict as a potential threat. Additionally, the radial left in Colombia felt that they had been sold
out by the agreement and began organizing for revolution.

Four main organizations formed to challenge the government in the 1960s. The largest, and the

group that would prove most significant in the conflict, was the Popular Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia (FARC), a Marxist organization that unified many different peasant groups from la violencia. The
Popular Liberation Army (EPN) was a Maoist organization that split off from the Colombian Communist
Party. The National Liberation Army (ELN) was a larger group led by Colombians who trained in Cuba after
the Cuban Revolution and were inspired by Castro. The Movement of April 19 (M-19) was made up of
members of the left-wing party ANAPO and primarily carried out terrorist attacks such as kidnappings,
taking hostages, and seizing weapons.

The early 1960s was a period of relative stabililty in Colombia as these groups focused on organizing

rather than on launching attacks. However, by the latter part of the 1960s, the Colombian government was
engaged in armed warfare with all four of these groups. The insurgents gained some initial success but a deal
between the Soviet Union and Colombia in 1968 cut off much support to the rebels and the Colombian army
was able to largely cripple their ability to wage sustained operations. In the 1970s, the rebels regrouped and by
the end of the 1970s, Colombia was experiencing full-fledged warfare again.

From the late 1970s through the 1980s the guerilla organizations continued to make progress in their

struggle against government forces. Groups such as the FARC increasingly turned to terrorist tactics such as
kidnapping to gain publicity and to intimidate the government. Additionally, while these groups maintained
their leftist orientation, they became much more closely tied in with the growing Colombian narcotics trade,
which provided them with an increasing source of funding.

In 1989, when the Cold War ended, the Colombian government took the opportunity to negotiate

with the rebel organizations. Several groups, including M-19 and the EPN signed peace deals and ceased the
armed struggle. The FARC and ELN, however, did not participate in negotiations and continue to wage
armed conflict against the government through the end of 2003. Additionally, several other insurgent groups
have emerged in the large areas of the country outside of the government’s control (potentially as much as
50% of the country), including factions of both the FARC and the ELN, the Worker’s Self Defense
Movement (MAO), and the Quintin Lame Commandos. Also entering the conflict in this period were right-
wing paramilitaries, private-organizations that attacked the left-wing rebels and their alleged supporters, and
were also heavily involved in illegal drug-trafficking to obtain funding. The conflict shows no signs of being
terminated as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Colombia vs. FARC

This dyad is best described in two phases. The first describes the early years of the conflict from 1966 to
1977. The second periods covers the conflict from 1978 to the present, when the FARC was in a stronger
position militarily.

Period 1: 1966 to 1977

Rebpolwing: no

161

The FARC did not form a political movement until 1984.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

Onwar.com estimates that in 1966-1968, the FARC had about 500 rebels. In September 1971, Keesing’s
Record of World Events estimated that the Colombian army had about 25,000 troops in mid-1967.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Departments of Huila, Tolima, Quindio and Valle
Effterrcont: moderate

There were several Colombian departments that were referred to as “independent republics” by guerillas
because the government had little control over them. Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in
September 1971 that the FARC was primarily active in the departments of Huila, Tolima, Quindio and Valle.

Newstartdate: 12/1/1966

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the FARC and the government first reached
25 battledeaths in December 1966.

Period 2: 1978 to Present

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

In 1984, the FARC formed a political wing, the Patriotic Union, that had candidates who competed in
elections.

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of the FARC: In 1987 and 1988: 10,000-12,000; in 1989: 5,000; in 1990 and 1991: 5,000-6,000; in 1992: 5,000-
7,000; in 1993: no estimates; in 1994, 1995 and 1996: 5,700; in 1997: 7,000; in 1998: 10,000; in 1999: 10,000-
17,000; in 2000, 2001 and 2002: 15,000-20,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 troops for
the Colombian military.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The FARC has been beset by factionalization in this period, and may have more than a dozen different
factions at any point in time.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Departments of Huila, Caquetá, Tolima, Cauca, Boyacá, Santander, Antioquia, Valle del Cauca,
Meta, and Cundinamarca and the intendancy of Arauca.
Effterrcont: moderate

Onwar.com reported that these areas were “FARC strongholds.”

162

Dyad: Colombia vs. FARC Faction

Note: There was very little information available on this group. In 1984, when the FARC signed a cease-fire
agreement with the government and created a political party, the Ricardo Franco Front (FRF), broke off from
the FARC and opposed the agreement. It is not clear how long they continued in the conflict, I could find
little reference to them after the 1980s.

Rebpolwing: no

The FRF did not have a political wing, rather they broke off from the FARC when the FARC signed a cease-
fire agreement and formed a political wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that broke away from the
FARC in 1984. However, it is clear that it was a small subset of the group and that it was greatly overpowered
by the Colombian army.

Dyad: Colombia vs. ELN

Rebpolwing: no

The ELN was formed when it broke away from the Colombian Communist Party, however, it has not
participated in the Colombian political process.

Rebestimate: 3,250
Rebestlow: 1,500
Rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the ELN: In 1989: 2,000; in 1990: 1,500-3,000; in 1991: 1,500-2,000; in 1992: 1,500-4,000; in 1993: no
estimate; in 1994, 1995 and 1996: 2,500; in 1997: 3,000; in 1998: 3,500; in 1999 and 2000: 5,000; in 2001 and
2002: 3,000-5,000. These values are in comparison to more than 100,000 for the Colombian army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The ELN has been beset by fractionalization during this period.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: parts of southern Colombia
Effterrcont: moderate

The area of Southern Colombia is almost entirely out of the government’s control and is controlled largely by
FARC and ELN.

Newstartdate: 8/15/1966

163

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the ELN first reached
twenty-five battledeaths on August 15, 1966.

Dyad: Colombia vs. faction of ELN

There is very little information available on this group. It appears that the ELN did experience some
fractionalization in the 1980s and in particular one faction of the ELN was accussed of some conflict
activities. However, obtaining independent information on how strong this faction was and how long it
operated was impossible.

Rebpolwing: no

It does not appear that the faction of the ELN was affiliated with any domestic political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the troop strength possessed by the faction of the
ELN. However, it does appear that the group was considerably weaker than the Colombian army.

Dyad: Colombia vs. EPL

Rebpolwing: no

The EPL has functioned as a guerrilla organization and does not participate in the Colombian political
process.

Rebestimate: 1,150
Rebestlow: 800
Rebesthigh: 1,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of the EPL: in 1989: 800; in 1990 and 1991: 800-1,500.

Newstartdate: 12/1/1969

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the EPL first reached
25 battledeaths in December 1969.

Newendate: 12/31/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that, although the EPL continued to operate after 1989, it was so
marginal that it did not generate 25 battledeaths in any year.

Dyad: Colmbia vs. M-19

Rebpolwing: no

In its early years, the M-19 was alleged to have connections to the leftist political party, ANAPO. However,
those connections were denied and as the conflict progressed it became increasingly clear that the group
operated independently.

164

Rebestimate: 800
Rebestlow: 100
Rebesthigh: 1,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates that in 1987 and 1988 the
M-19 had between 100 and 1,500 troops.

Terrcont: no

The M-19 operated primarily as a terrorist organization and did not maintain control of territory.

Newstartdate: 4/19/1970

It is not clear when this dyad reached 25 battledeaths. However, the group formed after a left-wing candidate
lost the presidential election on April 19, 1970.

Newendate: 12/31/1988

It is not clear when this group exited the conflict. However, it does appear that it was no longer an actor after
1988.

Dyad: Colombia vs. MAO

There is very little information available on this group that would allow for coding most of these variables.

Rebpolwing: no

The Worker’s Self-Defense Organization (MAO) is primarily a left-wing military group and does not operate
a political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the MAO.
However, the group was clearly much weaker than the Colombian army.

Dyad: Colombia vs. Quintin Lame

There is very little information available on this group that would allow for coding most of these variables.

Rebpolwing: no

Quintim Lame is a military group and does not compete as a political organization

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the troop strength of Quintin Lame. However, the
group was clearly much weaker than the Colombian army.

165

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Abel, Christopher and Marco Palacios (1991), “Colombia since 1958.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.,

The

Cambridge History of Latin America Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

166

Conflict: Dominican Republic vs. Military Faction (conflict id 1930)

Conflict Summary: On April 24, 1965, a group of supporters of former Dominican President Bosch, who had
been overthrown in a coup in 1963, supported by some junior officers of the military, took to the streets and
seized control of the National Palace and installed an interim president. The attempted coup d’etat turned
into a civil war, however, when the conservative supporters of the overthrown government fought back.
Additionally, the United States military intervened because U.S. President Lyndon Johnson accused the rebels
of having ties to communists. This military intervention eventually gave way to a Organization of American
States led peacekeeping force, which kept the lid on conflict while new elections were organized.

Rebpolwing: no

The people who carried out the coup d’etat were primarily supporters of ex-President Bosch, who had been
overthrown himself in a coup d’etat in 1963.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the supporters of
ex-President Bosch. However, it does appear that the faction would have been able to gain control of much
of the country had it not been for the U.S. military intervention.

Newendate: 8/31/1965

Keesing’s Record of World Events in September 1965, reported that the conflict was terminated on August
31, 1965, with the signing of a peace agreement between all the major parties.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

167

Conflict: Indonesia vs. OPM (conflict id 1940)

Conflict Summary: The archipelago of Indonesia is one of the most ethnicially diverse states in the world and
throughout its independent history has faced armed conflict from a number of groups demanding self-
determination. In 1963, the area of West New Guinea, or West Papua, which had been a Portugese colony,
was integrated into Indonesia and became the Indonesian province of Irian Jaya. The Papuan population was
not consulted about the integration, however, and within a couple of years an insurgency broke out in the
region which continues, albeit at a relatively low level, to the present day. By 1965, the Free Papua
Organization (OPM) had called for independence for the island and set up a “revolutionary” government
there. The conflict continued at a low level into the 1970s and then escalated against in 1976-1978 when the
Papuans launched attacks against Indonesian government offices in the province. The conflict is still not
resolved as of the end of 2003, however, it has never escalated to the point where it has registered as an
armed conflict since 1978.

Notes on Coding

Note: The armed conflict analyzed here occurred in two periods, one marking the outbreak of the insurgency
in 1965 and the other measuring the period from 1976-1978 when the conflict was at its most intense.

Period 1: 1965

Note: There is very little information available on this period.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The OPM was both a political and a military organization, and attempted to set up a parallel government in
Irian Jaya.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the OPM in this
period. It is clear that the group was much weaker than the Indonesian army, which is quite large, however,
the army was spread across many conflictual areas in Indonesia.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Irian Jaya
Effterrcont: unclear

It is clear that the OPM controlled some parts of Irian Jaya as they were able to establish a parallel
government. However, none of the sources gave information which would allow for coding the degree of
control exercised.

Period 2: 1976-1978

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The OPM was both a political and a military organization, and attempted to set up a parallel government in
Irian Jaya.

168

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in July 1977 reported that the OPM claimed to have 10,000 rebels. This
force was clearly much weaker than the overall Indonesian army, however, due to other internal and external
security threats the army had only 15,000-20,000 forces deployed in the province.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Irian Jaya
Effterrcont: unclear

It is clear that the OPM controlled some parts of Irian Jaya as they were able to establish a parallel
government. However, none of the sources gave information which would allow for coding the degree of
control exercised.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1976

The conflict between the OPM and the government reached 25 battledeaths again in 1976 but it is impossible
to date when that happened more precisely.

Newendate: 12/31/1978

The conflict between the OPM and the government de-escalated after 1978 and did not reach 25 battledeaths
again.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Onwar.com

169

Conflict: Peru vs. Leftist Guerilla Movements of 1965 (conflict id 1950, dyad 1270)

Conflict Summary: In 1965, the Peruvian government faced guerilla insurgencies from two separate leftist
organizations: the National Liberation Army (ELN) and the Movement of the Revolutionary Left (MIR). The
organizations had mobilized peasants throughout the 1960s in protest of the high level of disparity of wealth
in the country. The groups initiated conflict in rural areas of the country in July 1965. However, they were
well overpowered by the government and the conflict had ended in the utter defeat of the rebels by the end
of the year.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Peru vs. ELN

Rebpolwing: no

The ELN was only a military organization and did not compete politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ELN.
However, it is clear that the group was substantially weaker than the Peruvian army.

Dyad: Peru vs. MIR

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The MIR was a radical Marxist political party. However, it did not participate in the Peruvian elections.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ELN.
However, it is clear that the group was substantially weaker than the Peruvian army.

Dyad: Peru vs. T·pac Amaru

My research indicates that this group should not be included at this time, all references I found to Tupac
Amaru said the group took up armed struggle against the Peruvain government in 1984.

Source:

•

Béjar, Héctor (1970).

Peru 1965: Notes on a Guerilla Experience

. New York: Monthly Review Press.

170

Conflict: Peru vs. Leftist Guerilla Movements of 1980s-1990s (conflict id 1950, dyad 1290)

Conflict Summary: In 1980, Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) began a terror campaign against Peruvian
governmental officials. The group was formed by Abimael Guzmán, a Maoist university professor, and they
hoped that by conducting terrorism against the government they would force the military to overthrow the
fledgling democratic institutions in Peru and that popular dissatisfaction with a military government would
lead to civil war. The strategy was not successful, however, as the Peruvian military stayed within its
traditional role and attempted to fight the insurgency largely within the constraints of a (mostly) democratic
political system. Throughout the 1980s, Sendero Luminoso was able to continue the conflict against a
government that became increasingly frustrated with the inability to stop the guerillas. Additionally, another
actor joined the conflict in 1983 when the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), another leftist
organization, began carrying out attacks against the government.

On April 5, 1992, as frustration with Peruvian democracy ran high, Alberto Fujimori seized power in

a military-backed coup. One of his initial actions as presidency was to escalate the conflict against the
guerillas, a move that proved largely successful. In September 1992, Abimael Guzmán was captured. In 1993,
he called for peace initiatives with the government, and with the exception of a break-away faction often
referred to as Sendero Rojo, the organization stopped fighting. Sendero Rojo, led by Oscar Ramírez Durand,
continued the armed conflict through 1999 but was defeated by the government. Additionally, the army
scored major gains against MRTA, largely defeating them as an insurgent group, and the only thing the group
was able to accomplish after 1993 was the seizing of the Japanese embassy in 1996 and the holding of 500
hostages until 1997. However, the hostage drama ended with the storming of the embassy and the deaths of
every member of MRTA present, an action that appears to have completely defeated the group.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Peru vs. Sendero Luminoso

Rebpolwing: no

Sendero Luminoso was a Maoist political organization whose main strategy was to encourage the military to
overthrow the democratic political system in the hopes of evoking a popular backlash.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 8,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
Sendero Luminoso: in 1987 and 1988: 2,000-3,000; in 1989: 4,000-5,000; in 1990: 5,000; in 1991: 4,200; in
1992: 5,000; in 1993: 5,000-8,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 troops possessed by the
Peruvian government.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

Cotler (1991) writes that by the end of 1982 it was “already evident that SL was not simply a group of
common criminals but a very cohesive military and political group” (p. 491).

Newstartdate: 8/22/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Peru and Sendero Luminoso reached 25
battledeaths on August 22, 1982.

171

Newendate: 1/10/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that on January 10, 1994, Sendero Rojo broke off from the rest of the
organization which had decided to end the armed struggle. From that point on, conflict between the
government and Sendero Luminoso actually referred to Sendero Rojo.

Dyad: Peru vs. Sendero Rojo

Rebpolwing: no

Sendero Rojo was a guerilla and terrorist organization and did not have a political wing.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 250
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for Sendero Luminoso in
this period (which means Sendero Rojo): In 1994, 1995 and 1996: 3,000; in 1997: 500-1,500; in 1998: 250-500;
in 1999: 500-1,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 troops possessed by the Peruvian
army.

Newstartdate: 1/10/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that on January 10, 1994, Sendero Rojo broke off from the rest of
Sendero Luminoso which had decided to end the armed struggle. From that point on, conflict between the
government and Sendero Luminoso actually referred to Sendero Rojo.

Newendate: 12/31/1999

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by the end of 1999, Sendero Rojo had largely lost its abilty to
fight and the conflict did not reach 25 battledeaths in any year since then, even though the group is still
opposed to the government.

Dyad: Peru vs. MRTA

Rebpolwing: no

The MRTA is a radical leftist group that opposed the existing political order but did not have a political
organization.

Rebestimate: 350
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the MRTA: In 1988: 300; in 1989, 1990 and 1991: 500; in 1992: 200-500; in 1993: 500. These estimates are in
comparison to over 100,000 troops possessed by the Peruvian army.

Newstartdate: 3/14/1989

172

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the MRTA first
reached 25 battledeaths on March 14, 1989.

Newendate: 12/31/1993

Although the MRTA continued fighting on a small-level after 1993, the conflict never reached 25
battledeaths.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Cotler, Julio (1991). “Peru since 1960.” In Leslie Bethell, Ed.

The Cambridge History of Latin America

Volume VIII: Latin America since 1930 Spanish South America

. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univeristy

Press, 451-508.

173

Conflict: Ghana vs. Military Faction of 1966 (conflict id 1980)

Conflict Summary: On February 24, 1966, while President Kwame Nkrumah was on a trip to China, a group
of army officers led by Major-General Joseph A. Ankrah led a military coup and took power in the country.
Nkrumah did not return to Ghana, but rather flew to Moscow. The coup leaders justified taking power by
arguing that Nkrumah had been a corrupt dictatorial leader who presided over the economic collapse of
Ghana. Shortly after taking power they announced the military leadership announced that it did not intend to
stay in power, but rather would preside over the development of a new constitution and elections.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup against Nkrumah was plotted and carried out by members of the army of Ghana who did not have
a connection to a political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources available gave any indication to the number of troops that supported the coup.
However, the overthrow was accomplished relatively easily.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

174

Conflict: Ghana vs. Military Faction of 1981 (conflict id 1980)

Conflict Summary: On December 31, 1981, a group of army officers overthrew the Ghanan government of
President Hula Limann. Limann had been president since 1979, when a previous military government led by
Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings was in power. Following the 1981 coup, a new government, again led by
Rawlings, was established.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

In the aftermath of the coup d’etat, Rawling’s new government outlawed all political parties, suggesting that
the plotters of the coup were not affiliated with an existing political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much stronger

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops participating in the coup d’etat.
However, Rawlings was very popular in the military and most officers supported his reinstatement.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

175

Conflict: Ghana vs. Military Faction of 1983 (conflict id 1980)

Conflict Summary: Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings took power in Ghana in a military coup on December 31,
1981 and established a military government. That government experienced high degrees of instability in its
early years, however. In November 1982, an attempted coup d’etat was unsuccessful and many members of
the government were arrested and charged with participating. On June 19, 1983, another set of officers
attempted a coup d’etat which was again unsuccessful. Fighting between the supporters of the coup and the
army that stayed loyal resulted in more than two dozen deaths, and Rawlings was able to hold onto power.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup d’etat of 1983 was led by military officers who were involved in the military government and was
not associated with a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops participating in the coup d’etat.
However, it is clear that considerably fewer soldiers participated than stayed loyal to the government.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

176

Conflict: India vs. MNF (conflict id 1990)

Conflict Summary: The Mizos in the 1960s lived primarily in the northeastern Indian state of Assam, one of
only two majority-Christian states in the country. As Christians, the Mizos are both ethnically and religiously
distinct from the dominant Indian population. Additionally, the group has faced economic discrimination and
grievance has been generated by a national Indian economic policy that disadvantaged the northeastern states.
This discrimination has led to some calls for greater rights for the Mizo, leading up to some groups
demanding full independence. In the mid 1960s, an armed revolt broke out in Assam led by the Mizo
National Front (MNF). The MNF, with about 10,000 insurgents, demanded independence for the Mizo Hills
region from India, and began in 1965 attacking government positions and personnel. The Indian army
responded to the insurgency violently and by evacuating the civilian population from the areas where the
MNF operated, and by 1968 the revolt had been largely defeated. The conflict continued at a low level of
intensity until a political agreement in 1986 created a state of Mizoram within India.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The MNF competed in local elections but did not have much electoral success prior to the outbreak of
conflict.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in March 1969 reported that in October 1966 the MNF was estimated to
have about 10,000 troops.

Newendate: 12/31/1968

The armed conflict continued after 1968 but at a considerably lower intensity than it had during those years.
It is not clear when in 1968 the conflict dropped in intensity.

Sources:

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

177

Conflict: Nigeria vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2000)

Conflict Summary: On January 15, 1966, a group of junior officers in the Nigerian army killed the Federal
President and several other political leaders. Following these deaths, the remaining ministers in the cabinet
handed power over to the military, and General Aguiyi-Ironsi, the Commander in Chief of the Army, became
President. The coup took place in a time of civil unrest in Western Nigeria, where allegations of electoral
fraud in regional elections three months earlier had led to the outbreak of rioting and looting. In the few days
following the coup d’etat there was some conflict between different factions of the military but the new
government was able to firmly assert control.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup d’etat was led by members of the military that were not affiliated with a political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources identified gave any indication as to the number of officers that participated in the coup
d’etat.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

178

Conflict: South Africa vs. SWAPO (conflict id 2010)

Conflict Summary: Southwest Africa was a German colony until at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 the
German government agreed to give up all its colonies. In 1920, South Africa was given a mandate over the
former German colony. In 1966, amidst growning nationalist and anti-colonial sentiments in southern Africa,
the United Nations revoked the South African mandate. South Africa refused to give up control of the
colony, however. The revocation of the mandate did have the effect of mobilizing greater anti-colonial
sentiments in the colony and resulted in the formation of the Southwest African People’s Organization
(SWAPO), a guerilla organization which began an insurrection against the South African occupation. Initially,
SWAPO was not able to achieve much militarily, however, when neighboring Angola gained independence
from Portugal in 1975, the new Angolan government allowed SWAPO to set up bases on its territory. From
1975 to 1988, SWAPO continued to wage warfare against the South African forces deployed in Southwest
Africa, however, despite the insurrection and high levels of international pressure the conflict continued. In
December 1988, there was a breakthrough, when multi-party negotiations produced an agreement by which
South Africa agreed to withdraw from Southwest Africa and grant the colony independence (as Namibia),
and at the same time, Cuba agreed to withdraw its forces from the civil war in Angola (see conflict id 2310).
The conflict ended and Southwest Africa became the independent state of Namibia.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

SWAPO was primarily a military organization, however, it was recognized by many international actors as the
legitimate government of Namibia. It was not recognized by South Africa.

Rebestimate: 7,500
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 9,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
SWAPO in the latter years of the conflict: in 1987 and 1988: 6,000-9,000; in 1989: 9,000. These estimates are
in comparison to the 21,000 troops that South Africa had deployed in Namibia in this period.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

179

Conflict: Syria vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2020, dyad 1340)

Conflict Summary: On February 23, 1966, the government of Prime Minister Salah el Din Bitar, which had
been formed only two months earlier, was overthrown in a military coup. The coup was led by Colonel Selim
Hatoum, a military officer who was a prominent supporter of extremists in the Syrian legislature, and was
opposed to Bitar’s moderate Baathist-led coaliation. Fighting between members of the military supporting
and opposed to the coup produced many casualties before Hatoum’s forces took power. In the days
following the coup, many moderate Baathists were arrested, although Bitar escaped arrest and went into
hiding. Hatoum formed a new coalition.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

According to Keesing’s Record of World Events, Hatoum was a supporter of extremists in the Syrian
legislature. After the coup a cabinet was formed that was dominated by extremists.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources identified gave any indication of the number of troops that supported the coup.
However, those in favor of the coup were able to take power pretty quickly.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

180

Conflict: Syria vs. Muslim Brotherhood (conflict id 2020, dyad 1350)

Conflict Summary: The secularist, Baathist regime of Syrian President Assad faced opposition from a number
of extremist Sunni Muslim groups beginning in the mid-1960s. These groups wanted to overthrow the Assad
regime and to put in place an Islamist government. Although there were a wide variety of different groups,
they were commonly referred to as the “Muslim Brotherhood.” Beginning in the late 1970s, the conflict
between the Syrian government and the Muslim Brotherhood escalated as Brotherhood groups began
attacking key government positions and personnel. In 1980, the groups organized a full-scale insurrection in
the town of Aleppo. In 1982, full-scale insurrection broke out in Hama as well. The Syrian army responded to
the insurrection with incredibly high-levels of repression, killing more than 10,000 civilians, and by the end of
1982, the Muslim Brotherhood had been largely defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Muslim Broterhood was really a set of Islamist organizations that were not separate political
organizations.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Muslim
Brotherhood. However, it is clear that the group was weaker than the Syrian army.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

181

Conflict: Cambodia (Kampuchea) vs. various organizations (conflict id 2030)

Conflict Summary: Cambodia was one of the countries that was most devastated by proxy violence during the
Cold War. Following independence from France in November 1953 (see conflict id 1020), the country was
run as a one-party socialist state led by the former monarch Sihanouk (who abdicated the throne in 1955,
making his father monarch). Throughout Sihanouk’s reign he largely tried to keep Cambodia out of the
regional conflicts, but in the end was unable to do so. For years he pursued a policy favorable to North
Vietnam, seeing that side as the one most likely to win the conflict in Vietnam (see conflcit id 1520).
However, beginning in 1967, Sihanouk’s government faced a large-scale insurgency led primarily by the
Khmer Rouge, a Cambodian communist organization that was not on friendly terms with the government of
North Vietnam. As the conflict escalated, Sihanouk was forced to turn to anti-communist members of his
government to try to stem the insurgency. One of these members was the General Lol Nol, who he
appointed as prime minister in 1969.

In 1970, while Sihanouk was on a diplomatic mission in other countries, Lon Lol led a successful

coup d’etat which kept him out of power. Sihanouk fled to Beijing. Whereas Sihanouk’s government had
been on largely favorable terms with the North Vietnamese, the new government was staunchly anti-
communist and Cambodia became firmly embroiled in the Vietnamese war. North Vietnam helped forge an
alliance between the Khmer Rouge and supporters of Sihanouk, referred to as the National United Front of
Kampuchea (FUNK). For three years, the FUNK, backed up by strong military support from North
Vietnam, battled against the Republican government, led by Lol Nol, which received military assistance from
South Vietnam and the United States. In 1973, the signing of the Paris Peace Accords, which ended the
conflict in Vietnam, reduced the international presence in Cambodia, although there was still some support
provided. In 1975, following five years of guerilla insurgency, the FUNK was able to take Phnom Penh.
However, while the North Vietnamese called for a power-sharing government among the members of the
alliance, the Khmer Rouge leadership decided to rule alone and placed Sihanouk in jail.

The Khmer Rouge, led by Pol Pot, ruled Cambodia for four years as one of the most brutal

governments in history. They set about to radically reingeer the society and the economy by seizing all the
means of production and executing anyone perceived as being an intellectual. In all, somewhere around 2
million Cambodians were killed by the Khmer Rouge in four years of government.

Over the course of the Khmer Rouge government, relations between Cambodia and Vietnam

deteriorated until in 1978, the Vietnamese army helped to create an anti-Khmer Rouge communist rebel
group, the Kampuchean United Front for National Salvation (KUFNS) and deployed 200,000 troops into
Cambodia. In January 1979, the Vietnamese/KUFNS force seized Phnom Penh and a government led by the
KUFNS was established.

The conflict did not end with the establishment of a new communist government in Phnom Penh,

this time supporter by Vietnam. Rather, in the early 1980s three separate rebel groups representing the three
former governments formed an alliance to challenge the government (and also went by the name Democratic
Party of Kampuchea—PDK). The first group was the Khmer Rouge, who resumed their armed struggle
almost immediately after being removed from power. The second was a new group formed by members of
the Sihanouk government such as the former Prime Minister, the Khmer People’s National Liberation Front
(KPNLF). The third group was formed by Sihanouk himself, the United National Front for an Independent,
Neutral, Peaceful, and Cooperative Cambodia (FUNCINPEC) which formed in 1981 and shortly established
the Sihanouk National Army (ANS) to become FUNCINPEC/ANS. The Khmer Rouge/PDK, KPNLF and
FUNCINPEC/ANS continued to challenge the government throughout the 1980s without much success,
however, in the late 1980s with the end of the Cold War, Vietnam removed its troops from Cambodia, and
the international community increased the pressure on the parties to negotiate.

A peace agreement was signed between the parties in 1991 and a new power-sharing government led

by FUNCINPEC was formed. KPNLF transformed into a political party and largely ceased the armed
struggle. The Khmer Rouge, however, was unhappy with the speed of implementation of the agreement and
continued the armed struggle. The conflict continued through 1988, however, by that point the Khmer Rouge
had very little domestic support remaining and their ability to wage war had largely dissipated.

182

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Cambodia vs. Khmer Rouge

This dyadic conflict can be seen in three distinct periods. The first covers the period when the group batted
against Sihanouk’s government from 1967 to 1970. The second covers 1970-1975, when the Khmer Rouge
joined with Sihanouk to form the National United Front of Kampuchea (FUNK) and is covered under the
coding for the Cambodia, Vietnam, USA vs. FUNK dyad. The third period covers the conflict from 1979,
when the Khmer Rouge was removed from power, through 1998 when they stopped fighting.

Period 1 1967-1970

Rebpolwing: no

The Khmer Rouge was a communist organization that battled the Sihanouk government militarily but did not
compete in the Cambodian political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Khmer Rouge in this
period. However, it is clear that the group was not military equal to the Cambodian military.

Newstartdate: 5/1/1967

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Cambodian government and the Khmer
Rouge first reached 25 battledeaths in May 1967.

Newendate: 3/17/1970

On March 17, 1970, President Sihanouk was deposed in a coup d’etat. Shortly after, the Khmer Rouge joined
with Sihanouk to form the National United Front of Kampuchea, which started the second phase of its
conflict with the Cambodian government.

Period 3 (1979-1998)

Rebpolwing: no

Despite the signing of a peace agreement with the government in 1991, the Khmer Rouge continued to
compete militarily rather than politically.

Rebestimate: 30,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 45,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks give the following estimates for the troop
strength of the Khmer Rouge/PDK from 1987 to 1998: In 1987: 30,000; in 1988: 30,000-40,000; in 1989:
25,000-40,000; in 1990 and 1991: 30,000-45,000; in 1992: 27,000-35,000; in 1993: 8,000-10,000; in 1994:
6,000-15,000; in 1995 and 1996: 5,000-10,000; in 1997: 1,000-4,000; in 1998: 1,000-3,000. These estimatesare
in comparison to over 100,000 troops for the government.

183

Newstartdate: 1/9/1979

On January 9, 1979, the Khmer Rouge government was overthrown primarily by Vietnamese troops. The
group quickly began a new armed struggle aimed at regaining power.

Newendate: 12/25/1998

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that on December 25, 1998, the head of the Khmer Rouge (following
the death of Pol Pot) surrendered.

Dyad: Cambodia vs. FUNK

Rebpolwing: no

FUNK was an alliance between the Khmer Rouge and former President Sihanouk and did not represent a
domestic political opposition.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the troop strength of the FUNK.

Newendate: 4/17/1975

On April 17, 1975, Khmer Rouge forces took power in Phnom Penh.

Dyad: Cambodia vs. North Vietnam

Rebpolwing: does not apply

North Vietnam was a former state intervener in the Cambodian conflict and did not participate in the
domestic Cambodian political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that North Vietnam had in Cambodia.
However, the military presence was substantial and was a major threat to the Cambodian government, which
survived primarily due to external assistance.

newendate: 1/27/1973

On January 27, 1973, the various parties to the Vietnamese conflict signed the Paris Peace Accords, which
removed much of the foreign element to the Cambodian conflict.

Dyad: Cambodia vs. KUFNS

Rebpolwing: no

KUFNS was a new communist movement largely established by Vietnam that did not compete in the
Cambodian political process.

184

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the KUFNS. However, the
reason the group was successful in seizing power was because it was backed up by 200,000 Vietnamese
troops.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1978

It is not clear exactly when the KUFNS began fighting or when the dyad reached 25 battledeaths. However,
onwar.com reports that the group was formed in late 1978, and so the start-date is set as the beginning of
September.

Newendate: 1/9/1979

On January 9, 1979, the KUFNS, backed by 200,000 Vietnamese troops, seized Phnom Penh.

Dyad: Cambodia vs. FUNCINPEC/ANS

Rebpolwing: no

FUNCINPEC/ANS was a military organization and did not beginning competing politically until after it
exited the conflict in 1991.

Rebestimate: 15,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks give the following estimates for the troop
strength of FUNCINPEC/ANS: In 1987: 5,000; in 1988: 8,000-18,000; in 1989: 10,000-20,000; in 1990 and
1991: 15,000-20,000. These estimates are in comparison to the following estimates for the Cambodian
government: in 1987: 140,000 (including support from Vietnam); in 1988: 35,000-40,000; in 1989, 1990 and
1991: 50,000-70,000.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Cambodia and FUNCINPEC/ANS first
reached 25 battledeaths in 1982.

Newendate: 10/23/1991

On October 23, 1991, FUNCINPEC/ANS, along with several other parties, signed a peace agreement,
ending the conflict.

Dyad: Cambodia vs. KPNLF

Rebpolwing: no

The KPNLF was a military organization and did not convert to a political organization until after it exited the
conflict in 1991.

185

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the KPNLF: In 1987: 11,000; in 1988: 11,000-15,000; in 1989, 1990 and 1991: 10,000-15,000. These estimates
are in comparison to the following estimates for the Cambodian government: in 1987: 140,000 (including
support from Vietnam); in 1988: 35,000-40,000; in 1989, 1990 and 1991: 50,000-70,000.

Newstartdate: 6/22/1980

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Cambodia and KPNLF first reached 25
battledeaths on June 22, 1980.

Newendate: 10/23/1991

On October 23, 1991, KPNLF, along with several other parties, signed a peace agreement, ending the
conflict.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Onwar.com

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

SarDesai, D.R. (2003).

Southeast Asia: Past & Present

. 5

Edition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

186

Conflict: Nigeria vs. Biafra (conflict id 2070)

Conflict Summary: From 1967-1970, the Nigerian government fought an incredibly bloody war (up to 2
million dead) with the breakaway region of Biafra, which had been the Eastern Republic in the Nigerian
Federation. Disputes between the federal government of Nigeria and the Eastern Republic escalated
throughout the 1960s and were primarily over oil revenues. The Nigerian government saw its profits from oil
revenues reach unprecedented levels in the early years after independence, and although most of this oil
originated in eastern Nigeria, the Eastern Republic received very little of the profits. Tensions between the
republic and the federal government heightened when ethnic conflict erupted in northern Nigeria in 1966.
The population in northern Nigeria is primarily Muslim and Hausa-Fulani, and violence targeted against
northern Igbos (who were the vast majority of the population in the Eastern Republic) resulted in thousands
of deaths. In 1967, out of frustration with anti-Igbo violence and lack of appropriate oil revenues, the Eastern
Republic, led by Colonel Ojukwu, declared itself an independent Republic of Biafra.

The federal government responded quickly to the conflict by deploying troop to Biafra. The rebels

enjoyed initial success by defeating the troops sent and by actually gaining control of another territory of
Nigeria, the Midwestern Republic. However, by the end of 1967, the Nigerian forces had reversed things and
made gains on the Biafrans. The conflict was very bloody and raged for almost three years, however, by
January 1970, the Nigerian army had captured the last strongholds of the Biafran government, the Biafran
army surrendered, and the republic was reintegrated back into Nigeria.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link

The secession of Biafra was led by the government of the Eastern Republic within the Nigerian federation.

Rebestimate: 50,500
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 94,000
Rebstrength: parity

In September 1967, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that the Biafran army had about 5,000
troops, as compared to about 7,000 for the Nigerian army. Onwar.com estimates for the conflict that the
Biafran army had 94,000 troops as compared to 100,000 for the Nigerian army.

Newendate: 1/12/1970

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the Biafran government announced its surrender on January
12, 1970.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

187

Conflict: Guinea vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2110)

Conflict Summary: On November 22, 1970, warships containing at least several hundred soldiers landed in
Conkary, the capital of Guinea, and attempted to take control of the government. Violence flared throughout
the day but by the end of the day, the government forces had regained control of the city and the insurrection
had been defeated. The government of Guinea accused Portugal, who still had a colony in what was later to
become Guinea-Bissau, of masterminding the insurrection, which the Portugese government emphatically
denied. It appears that there were also disaffected Guinean military officers involved in the failed attempt.

Rebpolwing: no

It is not clear exactly who organized the attempted coup, but whether it was Portugal or disaffected Guinean
military officers, it was not linked to a domestic political opposition.

Rebestimate: 350
Rebestlow: 350
Rebesthigh: 350
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that on November 22, the country’s only legal party said the
invasion consisted of 350 foreign mercenaries.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

188

Conflict: Guinea vs. RFDG (conflict id 2110)

Conflict Summary: In September 2000, an insurgency broke out in Guinea along the border with Liberia and
Sierra Leone. Several different groups launched attacks against Guinean governmental positions there, but the
organization Rally of Democratic Forces of Guinea (RFDG) claimed responsibility for all of them. The
Guinean government alleged, and most international observed accepted, that the rebels received support
from the Liberian government and from the insurgent Revolutionary United Front (RUF) in Sierra Leone.
The RFDG waged a year-long campaign against the government but by the end of 2001 had been largely
defeated.

Notes on Coding

Note: The PRIO/Uppsala Armed Conflict Database lists this conflict as “Guinea vs. Military Faction” but it
does not appear that the RFDG was a faction of the military.

Rebpolwing: no

The RFDG appears to be an insurgent organization formed outside of Guinea that received a high-degree of
external support and did not have a link to a domestic political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the RFDG.
However, it is clear that the group was overpowered by the Guinean army.

Centcont: unclear
Strengthcent: unclear

None of the available sources gave any indication whether the rebels had a central command and how strong
it was.

Newstartdate: 9/1/2000

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict reached 25 battledeaths on September 1, 2000.

Newendate: 12/31/2001

Although the conflict was not formally resolved through a peace agreement, it did not again reach 25
battledeaths after 2001.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

189

Conflict: Philippines vs. Mindinao (conflict id 2120)

Conflict Summary: The southern Phillipine region of Mindinao has a population that is ethnically and
religiously distinct from the general Philipino population, and has been the location of much conflict in that
country’s sixty-year independent history. Whereas the majority Philipino population is Christian, the Moros in
Mindinao are overwhelmingly Muslim. The Mindinao region is the poorest in the Philippines and has been
the site of both a communist insurgency (see conflict id 1100) and a secessionist movement.

In response to economic and social discrimination and government repression, Mindinao groups

began organizing politically and militarily in the late 1960s. The main group was the Mindinao National
Liberation Front (MNLF) which formed in 1968 and spent four years organizing before it launched an armed
struggle for secession in 1972. The Philippine government responded quickly to the MNLF insurgency,
however, it was not able to completely repress the rebellion and over the next few years the MNLF gained
greatly in popularity. By 1976, the insurgency had generated such high costs for the Philippine government in
the form of loss of life, creation of refugees, and pressure for Islamic countries sympathetic to the Mindinao
causes that the government decided to negotiate with the rebels. The government agreed to grant autonomy
to all Mindinao provinces that voted for it. The MNLF, however, opposed the referendum provision because
thirty years of government-encouraged migration of Christian Filipinos to Mindinao had made the Moros a
minority in the region. The armed struggle continued.

By 1980, the conflict had largely abated. The Phillipine government had invested money in

development for Mindinao which reduced the grievance of the population and provided a generous amnesty
offer for combatants. For five years, the conflict continued, but at a much lower level of intensity. In 1985,
however, the MNLF took advantage of general unrest in the Phillipines and escalated the conflict. By this
point, the organization had fractionalized and there were three main factions battling the Phillipine
government, the MNLF, the new-MNLF, later named the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), and the
MNLF-Reformist Group. Despite some attempts at negotiations, the conflict continued through the late
1980s and into the early 1990s.

In the early 1990s, the conflict became more complicated with the emergence of the Abu Sayyaf

Group, a militant Islamist organization dedicated to the establishment of an Islamic state in Mindinao. Abu
Sayyaf functioned more as as a terrorist than a traditional insurgency organization and primarily carried out
kidnappings and attacks against civilian targets.

The 1990s saw several rounds of negotiations which had some success at lowering the intensity of

the conflict. In 1993, the government and MNLF signed a cease-fire that, despite several violations, largely
terminated the conflict between those groups. In 1996, a more comprehensive agreement was signed that
incorporated the MNLF leadership into the government of an autonomous Mindinao region. In 2001,
however, a faction of the MNLF rejected the agreements and resumed the armed struggle.

The MILF and Abu Sayyaf have continued to fight through the 1990s and the conflict between the

government and those groups is still ongoing. In recent years, the Phillipine government has gained from the
United States-led War on Terror because the U.S. army has began conducting joint exercises with the
Phillipine army, particularly against Abu Sayyaf.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Philippines vs. MNLF

This dyadic conflict is best described in three phases. The first covers the initial period of fighting between
the government and the MNLF from 1972 to 1980. The second covers the resumption of fighting in 1985
through the signing of a cease-fire in 1993. The third covers the conflict between the Phillipine government
and a faction of the MNLF which began in 2001 and continued until they were defeated by the government
in 2002.

Period 1 1972-1980

190

Rebpolwing: no

The MNLF was both a political and military organization, however, it did not compete in the Phillipines
political arena.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 13,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in April 1980 that the Phillipine government had about 35,000
troops deployed in southern Philippines to battle about 13,000 rebels there.

Mobcap: high

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by the mid-1970s, the MNLF movement had become very
popular and was supported by almost all Muslims in the Philippines and many abroad.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1972

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the MNLF and the government first
reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 1972, but does not give a specific date.

Newendate: 12/31/1980

By the end of 1980 the conflict between the MNLF and the government had largely abated. It is hard to date
when the conflict lowered in intensity more precisely.

Period 2 1980-1993

Rebpolwing: no

MNLF was a military, not a political, movement.

Rebestimate: 17,500
Rebestlow: 12,000
Rebesthigh: 23,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the MNLF: In
1989: 23,000; in 1990: 15,000; in 1991 and 1992: no estimate; in 1993: 12,000. These estimates are in
comparison to over 100,000 troops for the Philippine government.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1985

It is not clear when exactly the MNLF reinitiated a large-scale insurgency, but it was sometime during 1985.

Newendate: 12/31/1993

In December, 1993, the MNLF and the government signed a cease-fire. There were some violations of the
agreement but in general that agreement ended the armed conflict in this dyad.

Period 3 2001-2002

191

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The MNLF faction that broke off and resumed the armed struggle in 2001 was led by the former governor of
Mindinao, who was upset over the lead-up to a referendum on autonomy for the region.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 600
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 2001, the MNLF faction had 600 troops.

Newstartdate: 11/19/2001

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that on November 19, 2001, the conflict between the government
and the MNLF faction reached 25 battledeaths.

Newendate: 1/30/2002

By the end of January, 2002, the MNLF faction had been largely defeated.

Dyad: Philippines vs. MILF

Rebpolwing: no

MILF was a military, not a political, organization.

Rebestimate: 15,000
Rebestlow: 9,000
Rebesthigh: 120,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates of the troop strength of MILF: In 1994: 22,330;
in 1995: 19,000-120,000 (with best estimates being between 19,000-30,000); in 1996: 7,000-120,000 (with best
estimates being between 20,000 and 40,000); in 1997: 8,000-120,000 (with best estimates being between 8,000
and 25,000); in 1998: 9,000-15,000; in 1999: no estimate; in 2000: 11,500-15,000; in 2001: 11,000-12,000; in
2002: 12,500; in 2003: 10,000-12,000.

Newstartdate: 2/4/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths on February 4, 1990.

Dyad: Philippines vs. Abu Sayyaf Group

Rebpolwing: no

Abu Sayyaf is a terrorist organization dedicated to the establishment of an Islamic state in Mindinao and does
not participate in the domestic political process.

Rebestimate: 650
Rebestlow: 30
Rebesthigh: 1,200
Rebstrength: much weaker

192

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of Abu Sayyaf: In 1991:
30; in 1992 and 1993: no estimate; in 1994: 200-580; in 1995: 580-650; in 1996: 580; in 1997: no estimate; in
1998: 350-1000; in 1999: no estimate; in 2000: 1,200; in 2001: 1,004; in 2002: 300; in 2003: 300-450.

Newstartdate: 6/6/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Philippines and Abu Sayyaf reached 25
battledeaths on June 6, 1994.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

SarDesai, D.R. (2003).

Southeast Asia: Past & Present

. 5

Edition. Boulding, CO: Westview Press.

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

193

Conflict: Sudan vs. Islamic Charter Front (conflict id 2130, dyad 1460)

Conflict Summary: On July 2, 1976, as Sudanese President Nemery returned from a trip abroad, armed
civilians attempted to kidnap him and to take control of the government. They were unsuccessful and the
security forces retaliated with violent reprisals against those accused of participating in the coup attempt. By
the end of the day, order had been restored and the government had regained full control. In the aftermath of
the attempted coup, the Sudanese government accused Libya of training and supplying the insurgents, a
charge which the Libyan government denied. Whether or not the plotters were supported by Libya, it appears
that they were led in part by the Islamic Charter Front, the political wing of the militant Muslim Brotherhood.

Notes on Coding:

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Islamic Charter Front was the political wing of the Muslim Brother, a militant Islamic fundamentalist
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that after the attempted coup, the government said it had been
organized by 1,000 “mercenaries,” most of whom were from foreign countries.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

194

Conflict Sudan vs. Sudanese Communist Party (conflict id 2130, dyad 1470)

Conflict Summary: On July 19, 1971, an armored division led by Major Hashem el Atta and units of the
Presidential Guard captured President General al Nemery at his residence. Atta declared the government
dissolved and himself the new leader. Despite the attempted takeover, however, most of the military stayed
loyal to Nemery and over the next four days conflict raged between the military and Atta’s forces until, on
July 22, Nemery was restored to power. The coup plotters were arrested and tried and the government called
for all members of the Sudanese Communist Party, who had supported the coup, to be arrested.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The coup plotters were directly linked with the Sudanese Communist Party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication of the number of troops which supported Atta’s coup attempt.
However, it is clear that they were outmatched by the part of the military that remained loyal to Nemery.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

195

Conflict: Madagascar vs. Monima National Independence Movement (conflict id 2140)

Conflict Summary: In 1971, an uprising broke out in southern Madagascar targeted against government police
and military targets. The revolt was led by the Monima National Independence Movement, a leftist political
party. Southern Madagascar was the poorest region of the country and the area hardest hit by economic
problems that plagued the country in the 1970s. The rebels revolted against the government in protest of
their poor economic position and of discriminatory policies such as poll and cattle taxes that were collected in
cash. The revolt was quickly defeated by the police forces.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Monima National Independence Movement was a political party.

Rebestimate: 2,500
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Brown (1995) reports that the best estimates in the aftermath of the conflict are of 1,000 rebels killed and
1,500 (or up to 5,000) arrested. However, the official figure given by the government was 45 rebels killed and
847 arrested. It is not known what percentage of the rebels were arrested or killed.

Source:

•

Brown, Mervyn (1995).

A History of Madagascar

. Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers.

196

Conflict: Morocco vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2150)

Conflict Summary: On July 10, 1971, some military officers, led by General Mohammed Medbouh and
Colonel Mohammed Ababou attempted a coup d’etat against Moroccan King Hassan. To carry out the coup,
the officers told 1,400 cadets that the King was being held and they had to rescue him, when in fact he was at
a birthday party. Some of the cadets recognized the king and despite the deaths of several of the guests at the
party, the coup was unsuccessful. The vast majority of the armed forces remained loyal to Hassan and the
plotters were defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup attempt was organized by some officers in the military and not by a political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,400
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the leaders of the coup attempt enlisted 1,400 cadets to carry
it out, although the cadets did not know that it was a coup.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

197

Conflict: Pakistan vs. Mukti Bahini: Liberation Force (conflict id: 2160)

Conflict Summary: Since partition with India in 1947, the government of Pakistan, which consisted almost
exclusively of people from Western Pakistan, faced demands for autonomy from the primarily Bengali
population of East Pakistan. In elections in 1970, a party led by Mujibur Rahman, an East Pakistani
representative, gained a majority and Rahman was set to become Prime Minister. The minister intervened,
however, and would not allow him to take power and placed him in jail. From prison, he urged the
population of East Pakistan (which he referred to as Bangladesh) to rise up against the West Pakistani
military. Violent clashes between the civilians in East Pakistan and the Pakistani military led to massive
refugee flows into India, and from March to November 1971, an insurgent organization, Mukti Bahini:
Liberation Force grew from nothing to have nearly 100,000 troops. In late 1971, the Indian army intervened
in East Pakistan and the Pakistani army surrendered on December 16, 1971. Bangladesh declared
independence and formed a new government (which was for a while not recognized by Pakistan).

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link

Mukti Bahini: Liberation Force had close ties to East Pakistani political parties, and responded to a call by
Mujibur Rahman, who became the first prime minister of independent Bangladesh, to rise up against the
Pakistani government.

Rebestimate: 90,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 150,000
Rebstrength: parity

Keesing’s Record of World Events in December 1971 reported three different estimates for the number of
troops possessed by Mukti Bahini: one source estimated between 80,000 and 100,000, another source
estimated between 50,000 and 150,000 and one source estimated between 30,000 and 40,000. It goes on to
report that the Pakistani army had roughly 80,000 to 100,000 troops in East Pakistan.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Onwar.com

198

Conflict: Sri Lanka vs. JVP (conflict id 2170)

Conflict Summary:
This conflict is best described in two phases. The Sri Lankan government fought two separate armed conflicts
with the JVP: one in 1971 and one in 1989-1990.

Period 1: 1979
The Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna (JVP) is a Maoist political party which formed in Sri Lanka in the 1960s. It
competed in political elections and won some seats in parliament. Prior to 1971, it had supported a left-wing
coaliation government, however, disagreement with that left wing government led to violent protests, which
were met by harsh reprisals from the government security forces. On April 6, 1971, the conflict escalated
when members of the JVP attacked government facilities and tried to take over the government. They were
unsuccessful and over the next two weeks the security forces responded with severe repression, which
resulted in over a thousand casualties and in many arrests. The JVP was promptly defeated.

Period 2: 1989-1990
In the mid 1980s, the JVP reemerged as an organization opposed to the Sri Lankan government. By this
point, however, the organization had changed from a radical leftist one to a Sinhalese nationalist organization.
In the late 1980s, the JVP was violently opposed to the Sri Lankan government’s attempt to negotiate with
and offer of autonomy to the Tamils (see conflict id 2580). In 1988, the group began a campaign of violent
riots, strikes, and attacks against government positions. In 1989, the conflict erupted into full-scale warfare.
The conflict continued through 1990, but by the end of that year the government had killed many of the
leaders and arrested many alleged supporters of the JVP and the conflict had for the most part ended.

Notes on Coding

Period 1
Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The JVP competed in elections and was a participant in the legislature prior to its revolt.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops supporting the JVP. In the aftermath of
the attempted coup, 18,000 people were arrested, but most of those were released and it is not clear that the
ones convicted actually participated.

Newendate: 4/30/1971

It is not clear exactly when this conflict ended, but the Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the security
forces were able to regain complete control within a couple of weeks, so it is dated at ending at the end of the
month.

Period2
Rebpolwing: no

Although the JVP did later reemerge as a political party (around 1999), in this period it only opposed the
government through violence.

Rebestimate: 2,100

200

Conflict: Uganda vs. HSM, UDCM/UPDCA, UPA, and faction of UPDA (conflict id 2180, dyad 1520)

Conflict Summary: Shortly after Yoweri Museveni overthrew Tito Okelo in 1986 and took power in Uganda,
several insurgent groups emerged launching a military challenge against his rule. Each of these groups drew
its personnel largely from former members of the Ugandan army under the rule of Idi Amin, Milton Obote,
or Okello, all of whom had hailed from Northern Uganda. Museveni, by contrast, presided over an army that
was primarily made up of southern Ugandans. There were three major rebel groups that opposed Museveni in
the late 1980s and early 1990s, the Ugandan People’s Democratic Army (UPDA) which began with about
5,000 troops challenging Museveni. The group was beset by fractionalization, however, and by 1987 another
rebel group, the Ugandan People’s Army (UPA) had split off and joined the battle. In June 1988 the UPDA
signed a peace agreement with the Ugandan government and many of its fighters were integrated into the
Ugandan National Army, but a faction of the UPDA refused to accept the agreement and continued fighting
for a few years until in 1990 it was no longer viable. The UPA continued fighting until 1991 but the death of
its leader in 1990 was a major blow to the organization and it was soon out of the conflict. Another rebel
group present in the north at this time, the Holy Spirit Movement (HSM), had as its goal to overthrow
Museveni and to replace the Ugandan constitution with the Ten Commandments. The HSM had some initial
success but suffered crushing military defeats and by 1989 was defeated militarily. A high-ranking officer of
the HSM, Joseph Kony, formed a new rebel group, the Ugandan Democratic Christian Movement (UDCM)
or the Ugandan People’s Democratic Christian Army (UPDCA) and continued to oppose Museveni. By 1993,
however, the security situation in northern Ugandan had largely improved due to military success by the
Ugandan army.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Uganda vs. UPDA

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

In July 1990, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that a peace agreement had been signed between
the Ugandan government and the Ugandan People’s Democratic Movement (whose military wing was the
UPDA) and that the UPDA had 5,000 troops at that time. The UPDA was obviously weaker than the
Ugandan Army and never had any prospect of being able to win the war.

Dyad: Uganda vs. HSM

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in November 1987 that the Holy Spirit Movement had forces
that “were estimated to total more than 5,000.” Despite this number of troops, the HSM was never able to
challenge the army militarily, often charging into battle unarmed and relying on spirits to protect them.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UDCM/UPDCA

Note: The Armed Conflict Dataset lists these as two different groups. However, the references I found
referred to them as both groups led by Joseph Kony after the defeat of the Holy Spirit Movement and so I
am counting them as one rebel group.

Rebestimate: 500
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 800

201

Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1990 the UDCM/UPDCA had between 200 and 800 troops
and in 1991 the group had 500 troops. These estimates are in comparison to 70,000 troops possessed by the
Ugandan army.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UPA

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 3,000
Rebesthigh: 7,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Ofcansky (1996) writes that in April 1988 3,000 former UPA troops accepted an amnesty offered by
Museveni and disarmed. Since the rebel group continued to operate after that point that means that they had
more than 3,000 troops at that time. The rebestimate and rebesthigh are guesses based on knowing that they
had more than 3,000, and the 3,000 for rebestlow is just that bottom number.

Sources:

•

Ofcansky, Thomas P. (1996).

Uganda: Tarnished Pearl of Africa

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

202

Conflict: Uganda vs. ADF, LRA, and WNBF (conflict id 2180, dyad 1530)

Conflict Summary: In the early years after taking power Ugandan President Museveni faced opposition from
a number of different rebel groups (see conflict id 2180, dyad 1520). By the early 1990s, however, the security
situation in northwestern Uganda had largely improved. The main remaining rebel group opposing Museveni
was the Ugandan People’s Christian Army led by Joseph Kony, a fundamentalist Christian leader seeking to
overthrow Museveni and replaced the Ugandan constitution with the Ten Commandments and in the early
1990s that group was increasingly marginalized. Kony decided to reorganize opposition to the government
and launched a new group, the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) with support from the government of Sudan,
which was acting in response to Museveni’s support for the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA). In
1994 the security situation again deteriorated in northern Uganda as the LRA carried out attacks and
kidnappings against civilians. In 1996 two more rebel groups emerged to challenge Museveni, the Alliance of
Democratic Forces (ADF), a somewhat nebulous grouping of opponents of the government that operated
from a platform espousing an Islamist ideology, and the West Nile Bank Front (WNBF), a group led by a
former minister in Idi Amin’s government. Each of these groups was supported by Sudan and by Zaire under
Mobutu. In 1996-1997 the level of conflict was high in Uganda but over the next several years Museveni had
several successes that shifted the momentum strongly into his favor. First, the SPLA dealt a crushing blow to
the WNBF in 1997, effectively ending that group’s ability to challenge the government. Second, the Ugandan
army’s intervention into two successive conflicts in the former Zaire allowed them to gain a strong advantage
over the WNBF. Finally, an agreement between the governments of Uganda and Sudan in 2001 to each stop
supporting the other’s rebel groups led to a decrease in the access of the LRA and ADF to weapons and
funding. The conflict between the Ugandan government and those two groups continues in 2004 but at a
lower level of intensity than in earlier periods.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Uganda vs. ADF

Rebpolwing: no

The Alliance of Democratic Forces is composed of a group of opponents of Museveni’s rule and does not
articulate a clear political agenda.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,500
Rebstrength: low

The only reference to the troop strength of the ADF was in the 1999 Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute Yearbooks (SIPRI) which identified the group as possessing 1,500 troops. It is clear that
the group was considerably weaker than the Ugandan government, however, it was able to continue its
activities due to support from Sudan and Zaire (including Zaire allowing ADF to set up bases outside on its
territory) and due to the distance it was from the Ugandan government.

Dyad: Uganda vs. LRA

Rebpolwing: no

The Lord’s Resistance Army is a group with the stated goal of overthrowing Museveni and replacing the
Ugandan constitution with the Ten Commandments. To date the group has only pursued its objectives
through violent struggle rather than through the political system.

Rebestimate: 4,000
Rebestlow: 1,000

203

Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in 1996 estimated the LRA troop strength at 2,000, in
1997 estimated it at 1,000-4,000 and in 1998 estimated it at 6,000. In any case, the LRA was never a match for
the Ugandan army and survived by operating in terrain that was easy to defend and through attacks on
civilians.

Centcontrol: yes
Strengthcent: high

The LRA was led by Joseph Kony, who exercised strong control over the group.

Dyad: Uganda vs. WNBF

Note: There was much less information available on the West Nile Bank Front than on the other two groups
in this conflict.

Rebpolwing: no

The West Nile Bank Front did not work through the Ugandan political system in any way.

Rebestimate: unclear

None of the sources offered any information about the troop strength of the WNBF.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Agence France Press

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Uganda: IRIN Special Report on the ADF rebellion (19991208). Report from the Integrated Region
Information Network, accessed via the World Wide Web at
http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Hornet/irin-1230899c.html

204

Conflict: Uganda vs. Military Faction of 1971 (conflict id 2180, dyad 1540)

Conflict Summary: On January 25, 1971, while Ugandan President Obote was in Singapore, the commander
of the army Major-General Idi Amin led a coup d’etat which removed the Obote regime from power. The
now-overthrown leader went to Tanzania where he was welcomed by the government there. On January 26,
Amin proclaimed himself Head of State. Over the next few days there were clashes between Amin’s faction
of the military and troops still loyal to Obote in the Karamoja region, however, by early February resistance
had been quelled.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

This coup d’etat arose out of the military and was not driven by any political faction within Uganda.

Rebestimate, rebestlow: 10,200
Rebesthigh: 11,200
Rebstrength: much stronger

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported that the armed forces in Uganda, of which Amin was the head,
consisted of about 5,700 troops. The police force also supported the coup, which consisted of about 5,500
men. It is not clear how many of the troops supported Amin, although it was an overwhelming majority.
Keesing’s reports that as many as 1,000 troops stayed loyal to Obote in the days after the coup, and so the
best estimate variable is coded as the total number of military plus police minus 1,000.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

205

Conflict: Uganda vs. Military Faction of 1977 (conflict id 2180, dyad 1540)

Conflict Summary: In 1977, opposition in Uganda to Idim Amin’s incredibly oppressive regime was growing.
In January 1997, Amin claimed to have uncovered a plot to overthrow him through a coup d’etat and the
security services committed violence against those suspected of participating in the planning of the coup. It is
not clear whether there in actuality was a coup d’etat plan, but there was a high level of violence in Kampala
in the following months. The violence continued throughout the year as the country became increasingly
unstable.

Notes on Coding

Note: It is not entirely clear that there was a coherent “military faction” that was planning a coup so that this
should be treated as an armed conflict.

Rebpolwing: unclear

It is not clear whether the people accussed of planning a coup were actually planning one so it is difficult to
code whether they represented a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

Since the violence was based on an alleged coup plot, it is not clear if there even was a coup planned and, if
there was, how many people planned to participate. However, the vast majority of Amin’s government stayed
loyal.

Newstartdate: 1/27/1977

In January, 1977, Amin claimed to have found evidence that members of the government were plotting a
coup against him by January 27, 1977.

Newendate: 12/31/1977

Uganda was so unstable in this period that it is not easy to determine when the violence related to this alleged
coup attempt ended.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

206

Conflict: Uganda 1981-1988 (conflict id 2180, dyad 1550)

This conflict is best described in two periods. The first refers to conflicts between the Ugandan government
and a set of rebel groups when Milton Obote was president from 1981 to 1985. The second refers to conflict
activity in the few years after Yoweri Museveni took power in 1986.

Conflict Summary
Period 1

After Tanzania’s invasion and overthrow of Idi Amin in 1979 (see conflict id 2180, dyad 1570)

elections were held in 1980 to determine who would rule Uganda. The elections brought Milton Obote, who
had been Uganda’s first post-independence president, back to power amid widespread allegations of electoral
fraud. In the aftermath of the elections a number of rebel groups formed which were opposed to Obote’s
rule. In Amin’s home region of the West Nile the Ugandan National Rescue Front (UNRF) formed, led in
part by the former finance minister under Amin, and began violently challenging the government. Yoweri
Museveni, whose political party the Ugandan Patriotic Movement (UPM) had competed in the 1980 elections,
formed the National Resistance Movement (NRA) in the Buganda territory. The Ugandan Freedom
Movement (UFM), made up of members of the short-lived government of Yusuf Lule (the first president of
Uganda after Imin whose regime had lasted 68 days) also began operating in the Buganda region. The UFM
was never able to accomplish much militarily and in December 1983 a new group, the Uganda Federal
Democratic Movement (UFDM) formed, claiming to be the successor to the UFM but that group was also
marginal throughout the conflict. In 1982 a new organization, the Ugandan Popular Front (UPF) formed as
an umbrella group seeking to coordinate the activities of all of the groups opposed to Obote. Of these rebel
groups by far the most successful was the NRA, and throughout the early to mid 1980s the group continued
to gain in military strength until in 1986 Museveni’s forces seized Kampala and he took power.

Period 2

After Museveni took power the rebel groups which had been opposed to Obote stopped fighting.

However, a set of new rebel groups emerged to challenge his rule. Three main rebel groups were active in the
two years following Museveni’s ascension. The Holy Spirit Movement (HSM) was a group led by Alice
Lakwena that had as its goal to overthrow Museveni and replace the Ugandan constitution with the Ten
Commandments. The organization was able to rally a good number of soldiers (over 5,000), however was
completely outgunned by the NRA and suffered a series of crushing defeats through 1987 that rendered it
ineffectual. The Ugandan People’s Democratic Army (UPDA) formed by the former Prime Minister under
Milton Obote was also able to rally 5,000 troops to challenge Museveni, but in 1988 signed a peace agreement
with the government in Kampala. Finally, Force Obote Back Again (FOBA) formed in eastern
Uganda/Western Kenya to challenge Museveni’s rule there but had little noticeable success.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Uganda vs. UPM/NRA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The National Resistance Army (NRA) was formed by Yoweri Museveni after his political party, the Ugandan
Patriotic Movement (UPM) did not do well in elections in 1980 in which there were widespread allegations of
electoral fraud.

Rebestimate: 9,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 12,000
Rebstrength: weaker

207

Keesing’s Record of World Events in August 1986 reported that the National Resistance Army was believed
to have possessed between 6,000 and 12,000 troops. Ofcansky (1996) writes that the NRA had 6,000 troops
in August 1983 and that by the next year it had 9,000.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Buganda
Effterrcont: moderate

Ofcansky (1996) writes that “By January 1983, the NRA controlled approximately 4,000 square miles of
territory north and northwest of Kampala” (p. 54). This area was in the Buganda region of Uganda.

Newstartdate: 2/6/1981
Newenddate: 1/29/1986

Ofcansky (1996) writes that the NRA commenced guerilla operations on February 6, 1981. On January 29,
1986, Museveni was sworn in as President.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UNRF

Rebpolwing: no

The Ugandan National Rescue Front was made up of former members of Amin’s government and did not try
to articulate a political program.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Ofcansky (1996) writes that the UNRF had 3,000 troops. The group was never able to accomplish much
outside of controlling a small amount of territory in the Ugandan periphery.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Terengo County
Effterrcont: low

Ofcansky (1996) writes that “the UNRF operated mainly in Terengo County, a remote area between Arua
and Moyo. A smaller UNRF force conducted guerrilla activities along the Sudan border.”

Newstartdate: 1/1/1981
Newenddate: 12/6/1986

There was no specific reference to when the UNRF insurrection started. Keesing’s Record of World Events
reports that on December 6, 1986, the leader of the UNRF formally ended the insurrection and agreed to be
incorporated into the Museveni-led government.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UFM/UFDM

Note: My research suggests that both of these groups are the same. Keesing’s Record of World Events
reported in June 1984 that “In December 1983 a Uganda Federal Democratic Movement (UFDM) was
formed, led by Mr. Lawrence B Semakula who was thought to be a former civil servant. The UFDM claimed
to be the successor to the UFM and described itself as an armed movement, most of whose members were in
Uganda.”

208

Rebpolwing: no

The Ugandan Freedom Movement was a small group made up of supporters of former President Yusuf Lule
that operated primarily in the Buganda region. They never had a clear agenda.

Rebestimate: 500
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 700
Rebstrength: much weaker

The only reference to the number of troops possessed by the UFM is in Ofcansky (1996) who writes that in
1982 “about 300 UFM/A insurgents launched a mortar attack on Lubira Barracks in Kampala.” Assuming
that these were not all of their troops, the estimate is made at 500, with 300 as the low end and 700 as the
high. In either case, it is clear that the group was much weaker than the Ugandan army, and indeed the group
suffered a crushing defeat in 1982 that meant they were largely inconsequential through the rest of the
conflict.

Newstartdate: 2/9/1981
Newendate: 1/29/1986

On February 9, 1981, the UFM attacked army barracks and police stations in the area around Kampala, their
first military action. Shortly before Museveni took Kampala and was sworn in as President on January 29,
1986, the UFM surrendered to the NRA and pledged to support his government.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UPF

The Ugandan Popular Front (UPF) was formed as an organization in exile to coordinate the activities of the
rebel groups opposed to Obote’s reign. Because of this, most of the variables included in this dataset do not
apply to the group.

Dyad: Uganda vs. HSM

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in November 1987 that the Holy Spirit Movement had forces
that “were estimated to total more than 5,000.” Despite this number of troops, the HSM was never able to
challenge the army militarily, often charging into battle unarmed and relying on spirits to protect them.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UPDA

Rebpolwing: No

The UPDA was a militant group made up of supporters of former President Obote and did not have a
political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

209

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1987 and 1988 that the group only
had 1,000 troops. Regardless of the number of troops the group never presented a coherent challenge to
Museveni.

Dyad: Uganda vs. faction of UPDA

Rebpolwing: No

The faction of UPDA that rejected negotiations did not have a political organization.

Rebestimate: 2,000
Rebestlow: 1,300
Rebesthigh: 5,000

In 1990, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that the UPDA had 5,000 troops. The Uppsala
Conflict Database estimated that in 1989 the group had 1,300 troops and in 1990 it had 2,000. The estimates
are in comparison to 70,000 troops possessed by the Ugandan government (Correlates of War).

Dyad: Uganda vs. FOBA

This group was formed by Ugandan exiles in Kenya in 1987 to try to restore Milton Obote to power. There is
very little information available on this group but it appears that it was completely marginal.

Dyad: Uganda vs UPC

The Ugandan People’s Congress (UPC) was the political party of Milton Obote. I believe their inclusion on
Side B is a mistake because I find no reference that the group was active militarily after Museveni took power.

Dyad: Uganda vs. UNLA

The Ugandan National Liberation Army (UNLA) was the Ugandan army under Milton Obote. I believe their
inclusion on Side B is a mistake because I find no reference that the group was active militarily after Museveni
took power.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Ofcansky, Thomas P. (1996).

Uganda: Tarnished Pearl of Africa

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Correlates of War

210

Conflict: Uganda vs. UPA of 1972 (conflict id 2180, dyad 1560)

Conflict Summary: In 1971, Idi Amin overthrew Ugandan president Milton Obote, who had ruled since
independence, and took power. Obote and many of his supporters went to Tanzania and in September 1972
about 1,500 of them launched an attack back into Uganda aimed at overthrowing Amin. They achieved some
initial success, occupying at least three Ugandan towns, but were defeated in a matter of days. The conflict
raised tensions between Uganda and Tanzania, with Amin accusing Tanzanian President Julius Nyerere of
being behind the invasion, but tensions were lowered with the signing of an agreement on October 5, 1972.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The UPA was made up of supporters of Milton Obote, who had ruled Uganda from independence through
1971 when he was overthrown by Idi Amin.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,500
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the UPA had about 1,500 troops when it attacked from
Uganda. The force was clearly weaker than the might of the Ugandan army.

Start date: 4/17/1972
End date: 4/18/1972

Uppsala indicates two phases of conflict between the Ugandan government and the UPA. The first is this one
and the second one takes place from 1989 to 1991 when Yoweri Museveni was in power. The above coding
only refers to the first phase.

Sources:

•

Ofcansky, Thomas P. (1996).

Uganda: Tarnished Pearl of Africa

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

211

Conflict: Uganda vs. UPA of 1987-1991 (conflict id 2180, dyad 1560)

Conflict Summary: The Ugandan People’s Army (UPA) began an armed campaign against Museveni’s
government in 1987. The group claimed to represent northeastern Ugandans who had been prominent
members of the military and government in previous Ugandan administrations. The UPA leadership claimed
that Museveni’s government had committed atrocities against the population of northeastern Uganda. For
four years, the conflict raged at a high level, producing over 1000 battledeaths a year in both 1989 and 1991.
However, by the end of 1991, the group had been defeated by the Ugandan army and the conflict was largely
over.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The UPA claimed to be fighting on behalf of members of the military and government from previous
administrations. However, it does not appear that the group had a political organization of its own.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1990, the UPA had 2,000 troops as
compared to 75,000 possessed by the Ugandan government.

Newstartdate: 12/3/1987

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the government and the UPA reached 25
battledeaths on December 3, 1987.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

Although some conflict continued between the government and the UPA after 1991, it did not again reach 25
battledeaths in a year.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

212

Conflict: Uganda and Libya vs. Tanzania and UNLA (conflict id 2180, dyad 1570)

Conflict Summary: Uganda in the 1970s was under the rule of Idi Amin, the notorious African dictator with a
horrendous human rights record. Amin presided over the complete devastation of Uganda and alienated
many of Uganda’s former allies including Britain, the United States, and Julius Nyerere’s Tanzania. In 1978,
Nyerere approved the deployment of Tanzanian troops to remove Amin from power. The invading
Tanzanian army was accompanied by about 1,000 members of the Ugandan National Liberation Army
(UNLA), a group of supporters of former Ugandan President Milton Obote, who Amin overthrew in 1971,
that had been based in Tanzania. The Tanzanian army/UNLA alliance made quick gains despite Libya’s
deployment of 2,000 troops and the presence of several hundred Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO)
supporting Amin and on April 10, 1979, Kampala fell and Amin fled to Libya.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Uganda/Libya vs. Tanzania

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Tanzania was an external state participant in the conflict and did not have a political wing.

Rebestmate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 45,000
Rebstrength: stronger

Ofcansky (1996) reports that the Tanzanian People’s Defense Force deployed 45,000 troops to Uganda. That
force was clearly superior to the Ugandan government’s even with Libya’s support.

Dyad: Uganda/Libya vs. UNLA

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The UNLA was made up of supporters of former president Obote who had ruled Uganda from
independence to 1971.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Ofcansky (1996) reports that the UNLA had 1,000 troops. This force was clearly not strong enough to defeat
Amin without the Tanzanian support.

Source:

•

Ofcansky, Thomas P. (1996).

Uganda: Tarnished Pearl of Africa

. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

213

Conflict: United Kingdom vs. Irish Republican Army (conflict id 2190)

Conflict Summary: The United Kingdom, a historically protestant country, occupied Ireland, a historically
Catholic country, until the 1920s. The occupation led to conflict between the two sides. In the 1920s, Britain
divided the island into two parts, a Catholic Irish one and a Protestant British one. The Republic of Ireland
was granted independence while Northern Ireland remained within the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland
has a substantial Catholic population and that population experienced both social and economic
discrimination under British rule. The 1960s saw violent confrontations between Irish Catholics and the
British police forces in Northern Ireland, culminating in major protests in the late 1960s. In 1970, the Irish
Republic Army (IRA) formed to coordinate violent attacks against British police, and civilian, targets and over
the next more than two decades the group waged a terrorist campaign to try to force Britain to grant
Northern Ireland’s independence and merger with the Republic of Ireland.

Various peace initiatives were tried throughout the course of the conflict but until the 1990s, these

initiatives bore little fruit. In 1993, however, the first talks occurred between the British government, the IRA
and Sinn Fein (the political wing of the IRA). Over the next five years, the peace process moved in jumps and
starts but on April 10, 1998, all the parties at the negotiating table agreed to sign the “Good Friday”
agreement which created a power-sharing government in Northern Ireland, and the IRA agreed to stop
fighting. However, a splinter group of the IRA, the real IRA, rejected the agreement and pledged to continue
fighting, and they have done so at a low level of intensity since.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: United Kingdom vs. Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA)/IRA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Irish Republic Army was linked with a political organization, Sinn Fein. However, the British
government refused to talk to Sinn Fein until 1993.

Rebestimate: 300
Rebestlow: 250
Rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989, the IRA had 300 troops and in 1991, it had 250
“frontline activists.” This is in comparison to over 18,000 troops that the United Kingdom has stationed in
Northern Ireland.

Newenddate: 12/31/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the Northern Ireland conflict did not reach 25 battledeaths in
1992 and did not do so in any subsequent year.

Dyad: United Kingdom vs. Real IRA

Rebpolwing: no

The Real IRA is the faction of the IRA that rejected the Good Friday Accords and decided to continue the
armed struggle and is not affiliated with Sinn Fein.

Rebestimate: 150

215

Conflict: El Salvador vs. FMLN and other guerilla organizations (conflict id 2200, dyads 1600 and 1610)

Conflict Summary: In the 19

and 20

centuries, El Salvador’s economy was completely dominated by the

coffee trade. The dynamics of the coffee plantation economy led to a massive disparity of wealth between the
landowners and peasant workers in the country. The early part of the 20

century saw some protests by

peasants seeking access to land and higher wages for their work but the protests were brutally suppressed by
the alliance between wealthy landowners and the military that controlled the government.

The numbers of unemployed, landless peasants continued to increase throughout the 20

century

and by 1970, a number of political organizations had formed to campaign for more egalitarian economic
policies. By 1975, several of these organizations decided to pursue an armed struggle against the government
to force it to pursue more progressive policies, although they were unable to accomplish very much militarily
in the early stages.

In 1980 the left-wing guerillas were increasingly frustrated with the unwillingness of the right-wing

members of government to implement any reform policies and they formed a political front, the Farabundo
Marti Front for National Liberation (FMLN) to coordinate their attacks against the government. Throughout
the 1980s, the FMLN, and its constituent organizations, engaged in urban terrorism and rural guerrilla
warfare against the government. In January 1992, the FMLN and Salvadoran government signed a peace
agreement in Mexico City, and the conflict was ended. In December 1992, the FMLN registered as a political
party and has achieved political success in the post-conflict period.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: El Salvador vs. FMLN

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The FMLN was formed as a political organization to try to push for the demands of the left-wing guerilla
groups. Its greatest success, however, was as an organization to coordinate the militarily activities of the
groups. The FMLN was officially recognized as a political party in December 1992, after the conflict had
ended, but was not legal prior to that point.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 4,500
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in 1985 that the FMLN was estimated to have between 6,000
and 15,000 troops. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks give the following
estimates for the troop strength of the FMLN: In 1987 and 1988: 4,500-6,000; in 1989: 7,000; in 1990: 6,000-
8,000; in 1991: 6,000-7,000. This number is in comparison to tens of thousands of troops possessed by the
Salvadoran military.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Rural El Salvador

As a guerilla organization, the FMLN and its constituent organizations were able to set up parallel political
administrations in parts of the periphery of El Salvador.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1980

Dunkerely (1990) writes that the FMLN was formed in the Autumn of 1980.

216

Newendate: 12/31/1991

Although the conflict was not formally resolved until the full implementation of a peace agreement in 1992,
the fighting had stopped by the end of 1991.

Dyad: Government vs. People’s Revolutionary Army (ERP)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal:

The ERP was a left-wing political organization that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ERP. However, it is
clear that in this period the organization was relatively small and was well-overpowered by the military.

Newendate: 9/1/1980

The ERP did not stop fighting in the Autumn of 1980. However, the ERP and the other left-wing guerilla
movements formed the umbrella organization FMLN to coordinate their activities and so I count the ERP as
exiting the conflict at that point.

Dyad: El Salvador vs. Armed Liberation Forces (FAL)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal:

The FAL was a left-wing political organization that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FAL. However, it is
clear that in this period the organization was relatively small and was well-overpowered by the military.

Newendate: 9/1/1980

The FAL did not stop fighting in the Autumn of 1980. However, the FAL and the other left-wing guerilla
movements formed the umbrella organization FMLN to coordinate their activities and so I count the FAL as
exiting the conflict at that point.

Dyad: El Salvador vs. the Armed Forces of National Resistance (FARN)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal:

The FARN was a left-wing political organization that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear

217

Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FARN. However, it is
clear that in this period the organization was relatively small and was well-overpowered by the military.

Newendate: 9/1/1980

The FARN did not stop fighting in the Autumn of 1980. However, the FARN and the other left-wing guerilla
movements formed the umbrella organization FMLN to coordinate their activities and so I count the FARN
as exiting the conflict at that point.

Dyad: El Salvador vs. Popular Liberation Forces (FPL)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal:

The FPL was a left-wing political organization that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the FPL. However, it is
clear that in this period the organization was relatively small and was well-overpowered by the military.

Newendate: 9/1/1980

The FPL did not stop fighting in the Autumn of 1980. However, the FPL and the other left-wing guerilla
movements formed the umbrella organization FMLN to coordinate their activities and so I count the FPL as
exiting the conflict at that point.

Dyad: El Salvador vs. Central American Revolutionary Workers’ Party (PRTC)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal:

The PRTC was a left-wing political organization that also had a military wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the PRTC. However, it is
clear that in this period the organization was relatively small and was well-overpowered by the military.

Newendate: 9/1/1980

The PRTC did not stop fighting in the Autumn of 1980. However, the PRTC and the other left-wing guerilla
movements formed the umbrella organization FMLN to coordinate their activities and so I count the PRTC
as exiting the conflict at that point.

Dyad: El Salvador vs. Gerardo Barrios Civic Front

218

Note: There was very little information available about this organization. The only reference identified to
them was that they claimed responsibility for a bombing and for killing the attorney general in April, 1989.

Rebpolwing: unclear

None of the sources indicated whether the Gerardo Barrios Civic Front had a political wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the Gerardo Barrios Civic
Front. However, it is clear that the organization was completely marginal to the conflict.

Newstartdate: 4/14/1989
Newendate: 4/30/1989

On April 14, 1989, the Gerardo Barrios Civic Front claimed responsibility for an explosion in the capital.
Shortly later that month they claimed responsibility for assassinating the attorney general. I could find no
reference to the group after that and so assume they did not participate in the fighting again after April, 1989.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Lexis-Nexis

•

Wood, Elisabeth (2000).

Forging Democracy from Below: Insurgent Transitions in South Africa and El

Salvador

. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

•

Dunkerley, James (1980). “El Salvador since 1930” in Leslie Bethell, Ed.,

The Cambridge History of

Latin America Volume VII: Latin America since 1930 Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

219

Conflict: El Salvador vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2200, dyad 1620)

Conflict Summary: On March 25, 1972, some members of the Salvadoran military captured President Fidel
Sanchez Hernandez of El Salvador and kept him captive for 12 hours as they tried to overthrow his
government. The group was led by Colonel Benjamin Mejia and by Senor Jose Napoleon Duarte. Duarte had
lost to Colonel Arturo Molino in recent elections but Duarte disputed the results. The vast majority of the
military remained loyal to Hernandez, however, and he was quickly re-captured and the attempted overthrow
was blocked.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

One of the two leaders of the coup was Jose Napoleon Duarte, who had lost a recent presidential election.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources provided gave any indication as to the number of troops supporting the coup attempt.
However, Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the bulk of the military stayed loyal to President
Hernandez.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

220

Conflict: Oman, Iran, Jordan, United Kingdom vs. PFLOAG and South Yemen (conflict id 2210)

Conflict Summary: In the late 1960s, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Oman and the Arab Gulf
(PFLOAG) formed. PFLOAG was a Marxist-Leninist organization that called for the overthrow of the
“conservative” regimes in the Middle East, including that of the sultanate of Oman. In 1968, the organization
began waging armed struggle against the Omani government and was able to gain control of much of Dhofar
province on the border with South Yemen. The organization received assistance from the Soviet Union and
China, who funneled arms through South Yemen, and it also received direct military assistance from South
Yemen. The Omani government, meanwhile, received military support from Iran, Jordan and the United
Kingdom. In the early stages of the conflict, PFLOAG was able to capture a fair amount of territory and
create a nuisance for the government of Oman. However, the foreign support provided to the government,
combined with the global rise in oil prices in the early 1970s, meant that Oman gained greater resources to
pursue the war. In 1974 and 1975 the rebel forces suffered some crushing defeats, many of their members
defected to the government side, and by the end of 1975 they had lost control of Dhofar province and were
largely marginalized as a fighting force.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Oman, etc. vs. PFLOAG

Rebpolwing: no

The PFLOAG was a Marxist-Leninist organization committed to violent overthrow of the state and did not
have a political organization.

rebestimate: 2,000
rebestlow: 1,500
rebesthigh: 3,000
rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in June 1974 that in September, 1973, it was estimated that 2,000
troops remained with PFLOAG after 1,000 had defected to the government side (making the total before
that point 3,000). In February 1975, Keesing’s Record of World Events estimated that PFLOAG had at least
1,500 men. These troop sizes are in comparison to an Omani army of up to 14,000 men, supported by about
300 British officers, 2,000 Iranian troops, and several hundred Jordanian engineers.

Newendate: 12/31/1974

It is not clear when the fighting stopped completely in Oman. However, by the end of 1975 the rebels had
been handily defeated and were no longer able to challenge the government effectively.

Dyad: Oman, etc. vs. South Yemen

Rebpolwing: does not apply

South Yemen was a foreign state participant in the conflict and so did not participate in the domestic South
Yemenese political arena.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

222

Conflict: Rhodesia vs. ZANU and ZAPU (conflict id 2220)

Conflict Summary: Southern Rhodesia was a settler colony in southern Africa in which the small white
minority was completely dominant politically and economically. In the 1960s, as colonialism came to an end,
the British government began pressuring its colony of Southern Rhodesia to accept majority rule. The white
elites in the country refused, however, and in 1965 the white government there declared an independent
Rhodesia. The early 1960s saw the emergence of two African political movements dedicated to majority rule,
the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) and the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU), each of
which had a military wing. In 1965, these two groups waged armed struggle against the Rhodesian
government but were not able to accomplish much militarily.

In 1972, the conflict between the white-dominated government and ZANU and ZAPU reached the

level of a full-scale civil war. The guerilla organizations had used the period following their first failed
insurgency to regroup militarily and to forge ties with neighboring states and rebel groups such as Front for
the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO), an insurgent group trying to gain independence for
Mozambique from Portugal. Beginning in 1972, the two rebel groups pursued a strategy of guerilla warfare
and were able to achieve some success, although they were still no match for the Rhodesian army.

International and regional pressure forced the Rhodesian government to open negotiations with the

rebels in 1974. Negotiations in 1974 and 1975 achieved little as the government continued to oppose majority
rule. In 1976 the conflict heated up as regional leaders such as Kenneth Kuanda of Zambia and Julius
Nyerere of Tanzania began to see armed struggle as the only way to achieve majority rule and provided
greater support to the rebels. Additionally, South Africa, which desired regional stability, placed sanctions on
the government to force it to negotiate. In 1977 and 1978 the conflict continued to heat up and the military
situation was shifting to favor the rebels over the government. Finally, in late 1979 a comprehensive peace
agreement was signed which set the stage for majority rule but provided security guarantees to the white
Rhodesians.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Zimbabwe vs. ZANU

The conflict in this dyad is best described in two periods. The first covers the early stages of the combat from
1972 to 1975. The second covers the period when the conflict reignited after the failure of negotiations in
1975.

Period 1: 1972-1975

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

ZANU started as a political organization that also had a military wing. Hull (1976) writes that the organization
was banned in August, 1964.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The only estimate I could find for the number of troops possessed by the rebels was Hull (1976, p. 152) who
writes that in early 1976 the two rebel organizations together had 1,000 rebels in Rhodesia, plus 5,000-10,000
training in other countries. I could find no reference for whether ZANU or ZAPU had more so I have
divided that value evenly by two for both of them. This troop strength is in comparison to a Rhodesian army
of 5,000 troops, a police force of 8,000 and reserves of 45,000.

Mobcap: low

223

In this early phase of the conflict the guerilla movements did not have much success at motivating popular
support.

Armsproc: medium

ZANU was supplied with arms by China

Newstartdate: 12/21/1972

On December 21, 1972, guerillas attacked a white farmer in Rhodesia, the first confrontation of the war.

Period 2: 1976-1979

Rebestimate: 12,000
Rebestlow: 11,000
Rebesthigh: 14,000

The only reference I could find to the number of troops possessed by the guerillas in this period was in
Walter (2002), who writes that after the war, 22,000 guerillas participated in the disarmament process. She
also writes that not all of the guerillas demobilized, suggesting that the total fighting force for the two groups
was somewhat higher than that. Since none of the sources give an indication of whether ZANU or ZAPU
had more troops, I have divided the total estimate in half, adding 1,000 to each to represent the troops that
did not disarm with low and high estimates on either side of that.

Mobcap: high

In this phase of the conflict, the guerillas received high levels of popular support and ZANU was the most
popular. ZANU became the dominant political party in Zimbabwe after the conflict ended.

Newstartdate: 2/1/1976

Walter (2002) writes that ZANU and ZAPU reignited the armed struggle in February, 1972 after the failure of
peace negotiations.

Newendate: 12/17/1979

The Rhodesian government agreed to a cease-fire on December 17, 1979, effectively ending the conflict.

Dyad: Zimbabwe vs. ZAPU

The conflict in this dyad is best described in two periods. The first covers the early stages of the combat from
1972 to 1975. The second covers the period when the conflict reignited after the failure of negotiations in
1975.

Period 1: 1972-1979

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

ZAPU started as a political movement that also had an armed wing. Hull (1976) writes that the organization
was banned in September, 1962.

224

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The only estimate I could find for the number of troops possessed by the rebels in this period was Hull
(1976, p. 152) who writes that in early 1976 the two rebel organizations together had 1,000 rebels in Rhodesia,
plus 5,000-10,000 training in other countries. I could find no reference for whether ZANU or ZAPU had
more so I have divided that value evenly by two for both of them. This troop strength is in comparison to a
Rhodesian army of 5,000 troops, a police force of 8,000 and reserves of 45,000.

Mobcap: low

The guerilla organizations were not able to mobilize much popular support in this period.

Armsproc: moderate

ZAPU was supplied with arms by the Soviet Union.

Period 2: 1976-1979

The only reference I could find to the number of troops possessed by the guerillas in this period was in
Walter (2002), who writes that after the war, 22,000 guerillas participated in the disarmament process. She
also writes that not all of the guerillas demobilized, suggesting that the total fighting force for the two groups
was somewhat higher than that. Since none of the sources give an indication of whether ZANU or ZAPU
had more troops, I have divided the total estimate in half, adding 1,000 to each to represent the troops that
did not disarm with low and high estimates on either side of that.

Mobcap: moderate

The guerilla organizations were able to mobilize much more popular support in this period. However, ZANU
was clearly the most popular of the two organizations.

Sources:

•

Hull, Richard W. (1976). “The Conflict in Rhodesia.”

Current History

71(421): 149-152, 185.

•

Walter, Barbara F. (2002).

Committing to Peace: The Successful Settlement of Civil Wars

. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

•

Martin, David and Phyllis Johnson (1981).

The Struggle for Zimbabwe: The Chimurenga War

. London,

UK: Faber and Faber.

225

Conflict: Uruguay vs. MLN or Tupamoros (conflict id 2230)

Conflict Summary: In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the government of Uruguay faced a challenge from a
militant left-wing organization, the National Liberation Movement (MLN) or Tupamoros. In 1970, the group
pursued a strategy of kidnapping foreigners in Uruguay to gain attention and to increase pressure on the
government. Over the next two years the group was able to recruit enough members and mobilize enough
popular support to stay militarily viable, however, they were eventually defeated by the military.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The MLN was a military, not a political, organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the MLN. However, it is
clear that the organization was weaker than the overall Uruguayan military and was able to survive primarily
through terrorist activities, kidnappings, and staying in the periphery.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Latin America, obtained via Lexis-Nexis

226

Conflict: Chile vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2250)

Conflict Summary: On September 11, 1973, General Augusto Pinochet, supported by the Chilean army, navy
and air force overthrew President Salvador Allende and replaced his left-wing government with a new
cabinet. Allende had been elected President with a plurality of the vote but a very small percentage, and
Chilean politics was highly divided between the left and the right. The period leading up to the coup d’etat
was characterized by a high level of insecurity in the country including strikes and violence by right-wing
groups.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Pinochet was opposed to Allende’s left-wing policies and was clearly more of a supporter of the right-wing.
However, the coup was led by the military, not an organized political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much stronger

None of the sources give any clear indication of the number of troops that supported the coup. However, the
air force, army and navy all supported Pinochet and Allende was completely outmatched.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

227

Conflict: Bangaldesh vs. JSS/SB/Shanti Bahini (conflict id 2260)

Conflict Summary: The Chittagong Hill Tribes is a minority ethnic group that resides largely in the
Chittagong Hill Tracts, a region of southeastern Bangladesh. When Bangladesh was part of the British colony
of India, the Tribes had a large degree of autonomy, including over the issue of migration into the region.
However, when what is now Bangladesh became part of East Pakistan at partition in 1947, this autonomy
was largely revoked. When Bangladesh became independent from Pakistan in 1971, the Tribes did not gain
back their autonomy. In fact, both Pakistan and Bangladesh encouraged migration into the area, which
enraged members of the Chittagong Hill Tribes that feared they would become a minority in that area.
Shortly after independence, movements calling for autonomy for the province emerged and in 1972, the Jana
Samhati Samiti (JSS) was formed to demand greater autonomy. In 1975, the armed wing of the JSS, the Shanti
Bahini (SB) became waging guerilla warfare in the province to try to pressure for greater autonomy. The
Bangladeshi government deployed a substantial military force to the province in the late 1970s and 1980s, but
they were not able to completely defeat the rebels and low-intensity conflict continued throughout that
period. In 1989, after the failure of several years of dialogue with groups from the Chittagong Hill Tribes, the
Bangladeshi government decided to unilaterally grant a degree of autonomy to the province. Shanti Bahini
was unsatisfied with the offer, however, and continued the fight and the conflict reached a peak in intensity
from 1989 to 1992. In 1992, a democrat government was elected in Bangladesh and the new government
offered a policy of negotiating with the rebels. The JSS/SB responded with a three-month unilateral cease-fire
and negotiations commenced. The negotiations were not able to produce a comprehensive peace agreement
until 1997, however, despite occasional violence, the conflict did not reach a noticeable level of intensity from
1992 through 1997. In 1997, the government and the rebels signed a deal granting a good amount of
autonomy to the province, however, a faction of the JSS/SB is unsatisfied with the deal and still continues
fighting, although the violence is at a low level.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the Jana Samhati Samiti is an organization devoted to pushing for greater autonomy for the
province, I could find no evidence that it has participated in the Bangladeshi political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the JSS/SB had about 5,000 guerilla soldiers across the course
of the conflict. This troop strength is in comparison to about 70,000 Bangladeshi soldiers deployed to the
province.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

228

Conflict: Cyprus vs. Turkish Cypriots and Turkey (conflict id 2270)

Conflict Summary: Cyprus is an island that is mostly divided between Greek and Turkish Cypriot
communities. There has been much tension on and over the island of Cyprus since its independence from
Britain in 1960. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was conflict between Greek Cypriots, who wanted the island to
become part of Greece and Turkish Cypriots, who wanted the island to have closer ties to Turkey. The island
is majority Greek and the Turkish community feared manipulation by Athens. On July 15, 1974, the national
guard, which was largely controlled by the government in Athens, attempted a coup d’etat against the Cypriot
government and declared that they had been successful in assassinating President Makarios and taking control
of the island. The government of Turkey saw the coup d’etat and subsequent naming of a militant Greek-
nationalist as President as signs that Athens was violating the independence of the island, and on July 20,
1974, they deployed a massive military force onto Cyprus. Armed conflict between Greece and Turkey
seemed imminent, however, three days the government in Athens collapsed and the post-coup Cypriot
government was overthrown. Negotiations over the next several weeks were unable to produce an agreement
over the territorial division of the island (the Turkish Cypriots wanted control over 34% of the island to
correspond to their percentage of the population), and on August 14 the Turkish army started a second
offensive. They seized 39% of the island (which would nine years later be declared the “Turkish Republic of
North Cyprus”) and on August 18 declared a cease-fire. The cease-fire line would become the de-facto border
between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities.

In the midst of the fighting between Turkey and the Greek and Greek Cypriot forces on Cyprus,

there was also a high-level of intercommunal conflict between Turkish and Greek Cypriots. This conflict
produced many casualties and led to a massive movement of people, making what had been an island of
many mixed ethnic communities to one where Greek and Turkish Cypriots lived together in their own areas.
This scenario would continue to the present day.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Cyprus vs. Turkey

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Turkey is a foreign state intervening on Cyprus and so did not participate in the domestic political arena.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 30,000
Rebstrength: stronger

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in August 1974 that, after the deployed was complete, the
Turkish army had 30,000 troops on Cyprus. This military force was significantly stronger than the military of
the island.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Northern Cyprus
Effterrcont: high

In their second offensive, which began on August 14, 1974, the Turkish army seized the northern 39% of the
island.

Dyad: Cyprus vs. Turkish Cypriots

Rebpolwing: no

230

Conflict: Pakistan vs. Baluchi Separatists (conflict id 2290)

Conflict Summary: The Baluchi are an ethnic group that lives along the border with Afghanistan and Iran.
The Baluchi are economically disadvantaged within Pakistan and Baluchistan, the province where the majority
of the Baluchi live, has traditionally been the poorest province in the country. Prior to 1973, Baluchistan was
given a large degree of autonomy from the central government, however, in the aftermath of the secession of
East Pakistan, which became Bangladesh, the Pakistani government removed the provincial authority in
Baluchistan and took control of the province. This move was very unpopular among the Baluchi and led to
an uprising by militants demanding Baluchi secession. For the next four years the Pakistani government,
which had an overwhelming military advantage, was unable to completely defeat the Baluchi militants. The
conflict did not end until 1977 when the government of Pakistan was overthrown in a military coup. The new
government declared a general amnesty for Baluchi guerillas, released thousands of political prisoners, and
introduced policies designed to alleviate poverty in the province. These policies led to an end of the armed
struggle, although there have been continuing grievances by Baluchi against the Pakistani government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The rebels were believed to have been linked to the provincial government which was removed in 1973.

Rebestimate: 7,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 8,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in March 1975, estimated that the Baluchi guerillas had between 6,000 and
8,000 troops. This number was in comparison to 100,000 troops that the Pakistani army had deployed in the
province.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

231

Conflict: Angola (conflict id 2310)

Conflict Summary: The almost thirty year war that began in Angola in 1975 had roots going back a decade
earlier. Angola was a Portuguese colony and the Portuguese held onto their colonial possessions longer than
most other European powers. Beginning in the mid-1960s, three armed rebel groups, the Movement for the
Popular Liberation of Angola (MPLA), the Union for the Total Liberation of Angola (UNITA) and the
National Front for the Liberation of Angola (FNLA) waged a violent struggle to force Portugal to grant
independence (see conflict id 1660). In 1974, following a coup in Portugal, that country agreed to pull out of
its colonies, and a peace deal was signed between the three armed groups and the government. Portugal
mainly wanted out of a costly conflict, however, and did not play much of a role in the transition to
independence. A transitional power-sharing government between the MPLA, FNLA and UNITA collapsed
in the months prior to independence and the three anti-colonial groups began fighting each other. Upon
independence on November 11, 1975, Angola was already immersed in a civil war that would continue for
decades. The civil war in Angola from the onset of independence had strong external components, as the
conflict became intertwined with both global Cold War and the regional anti-apartheid struggles.

At the time of independence, the MPLA emerged as the strongest rebel group with the financial

backing of the Soviet Union and military support from Cuba. UNITA quickly gained access to support from
South Africa and from Zaire (who was heavily supported by the United States). The FLNA, who was unable
to obtain an external patron, was quickly overwhelmed by the MPLA and in 1976 were driven into exile in
Zaire. From 1976 on, the conflict in Angola was between the MPLA and UNITA and their external patrons.

From 1976 to 1981, the conflict in Angola was at a relatively low level of intensity as the MPLA was

military dominant and UNITA waged low-level guerilla warfare and built up its force. By the early-1980s,
however, the conflict had again reached a high level of intensity as UNITA had much increased its military
capacity and the conflict ground on at an extremely high level almost uninterrupted for the next ten years.

In 1991, a peace agreement was signed at Bicesse, Portugal, that paved the way for national elections

in 1992. MPLA defeated UNITA in elections that international observers certified as “free and fair” but
UNITA leader Jonas Savimbi refused to recognize the elections and the group returned to war. In the initial
period after the election UNITA was able to gain control of much of the country, however, the MPLA was
quickly able to regroup and to take back most of the major cities. The war raged until 1994 when another
agreement signed at Lusaka, Zambia, led to a decrease in the intensity of the conflict. However, the collapse
of the Lusaka Accords in 1998 brought full-scale war to Angola once again.

In the 1990s, the Angolan conflict expanded beyond that country’s borders as Zairean President

Mobutu allowed UNITA to establish rear bases on Zairean territory. The use of Zaire as a launching pad for
UNITA’s attacks was one of the reasons that Angola intervened in the war to oust Mobutu from power and,
subsequently, to defend his successor, Laurent Kabila (see conflict id 1860). The intervention in
Zaire/Democratic Republic of the Congo lessened the military capacity of UNITA and the group found its
ability to wage war in Angola weakened in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

On February 13, 2002, the MPLA achieved a major victory when the army shot and killed Jonas

Savimbi. Within a month new negotiations had begun between the two parties and by the end of the year a
cease-fire had been implemented and the conflict appeared to be over.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Angola and Cuba vs. FNLA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Prior to independence, FNLA was involved in a power-sharing transitional government with MPLA and
UNITA.

Rebestimate: unclear

232

Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources available provided any reference to the troop strength possessed by the FNLA.
However, the group was able to accomplish very little militarily and was quickly driven out of the country by
the MPLA, which received heavy Cuban and Soviet support.

Newendate: 12/31/1976

It is hard to determine when FNLA stopped being an actor in the conflict. It appears that by early 1976 the
group had been defeated military and no longer was a player. However, the group continued to claim that it
was in control of much of the north of the country through 1976. By 1977, however, the FNLA was
completely in exile in Zaire.

Dyad: Angola and Cuba vs. South Africa

Rebpolwing: does not apply

South Africa was an external state intervening to oppose a Soviet-backed anti-apartheid government in the
MPLA. It did not participate in the domestic Angolan political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks reports that in 1987 and 1988 South Africa
had 6,000 troops in Angola. This estimate was in comparison to 40,000 troops for the government in 1987
(backed up by 40,000 Cuban troops) and 50,000 in 1988 (backed up by 50,000 from Cuba).

Newendate: 12/31/1988

South Africa and Cuba both agreed to pull out of Angola in 1988 as part of a regional peace deal that also led
to the independence of Namibia.

Dyad: Angola and Cuba vs. Zaire

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Zaire was an external state intervening in the Angolan conflict and so did not participate in the domestic
Angolan political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources identified provide any indication of the number of troops Zaire had in Angola.
However, it is clear that Zaire mostly provided financial support to UNITA, rather than having a strong
military presence in the country.

Newendate: 12/31/1989

It is not easy to determine when Zaire pulled out of the Angolan conflict military. However, clearly by the
end of the 1980s Zaire was no longer military involved, although it continued to provide some support to
UNITA.

233

Dyad: Angola, Cuba and Namibia vs. UNITA

This dyad is best described in four periods. The first, from 1975 to 1981, incorporates the first six years after
independence in which UNITA was quickly defeated and then spent years waging low intensity conflict. The
second period ranges from 1981 to 1991, the period in which the two sides were very evenly matched and
leading up to a peace accord which brought national elections. The third, from 1992 to 1994 ranges from
UNITA’s rejection of those elections to the signing of another, partially implemented, peace accord at
Lusaka, Zambia. The final period covers the last four years of the conflict, from 1998 to 2002, following the
breakdown of the Lusaka agreement, the fighting in Zaire/the DRC, and culminating in Savimbi’s death and
the subsequent peace agreement.

Period 1 (1975-1981)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Prior to the end of colonialism, UNITA participated in a transitional power-sharing government with MPLA
and FNLA.

Rebestimate: 3,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

James III (1992) writes that “UNITA strength estimates ranged from two thousand to three thousand in early
1975” (p. 95). This force was quite weak when compared to the tens of thousands of Cuban troops that were
in the country supporting the MPLA.

Period 2 (1981-1991)

Rebpolwing: no

Although UNITA had participated in Angolan politics in the years prior to independence, in this period they
focused on armed struggle. It was not until after the signing of a peace accord in 1991 that they competed in
elections.

Rebestimate: 50,000
Rebestlow: 15,000
Rebesthigh: 65,000
Rebstrength: weaker

James III (1992, p. 95-96) writes that UNITA had roughly 15,000 troops in 1984. The Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of UNITA in
1987-1991: In 1987 and 1988—40,000; in 1989—50,000; in 1990—65,000; in 1991—60,000. This is in
comparison to the following numbers for the Angolan government army: In 1987—50,000 (plus 40,000
troops from Cuba); in 1988—50,000 (plus 50,000 troops from Cuba); in 1989—100,000 (plus 50,000 from
Cuba); in 1990 and 1991—100,000.

Newendate: 5/1/1991

In May, 1991, UNITA and the Angolan government signed the Bicesse Accords which paved the way for
elections in 1992 and brought a temporary end to the conflict.

234

Period 3 (1992-1994)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The third period of the conflict began when UNITA rejected the results of elections in 1992. However,
UNITA had participated in those elections and they were generally recognized by the international
community as “free and fair.”

Rebestimate: 45,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 60,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following troop estimates for UNITA: In
1992—30,000-50,000; in 1993—45,000; in 1994—60,000. This is in comparison to the following estimates
for the Angolan government: In 1992—30,000-50,000; in 1993—50,000; in 1994—90,000.

Mobcap: moderate

In elections in 1992, UNITA received 40% of the vote compared to 49% for the MPLA, demonstrating that
they did still have a strong degree of popular support.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1992

UNITA re-opened the armed struggle when it lost elections in September 1992.

Newendate: 11/20/1994

A peace agreement was signed between UNITA and the government at Lusaka, Zambia, on November 20,
1994. The agreement incorporated UNITA into the government.

Period 4 (1998-2002)

Rebpolwing: no

The fourth period of the conflict began when UNITA rejected the Lusaka Peace Accords and pulled out of
the government.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 60,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
UNITA: In 1998—30,000; in 1999—50,000-60,000; in 2000—20,000-50,000; in 2001—10,000-30,000; in
2002—10,000-20,000. These numbers are in comparison to the following estimates for the government: In
1998, 1999 and 2000—110,000; in 2001—130,000; in 2002—100,000.

Terrcont: no

235

By this period of the conflict UNITA had been largely driven out of Angola and into neighboring
Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Newenddate: 3/13/2002

On March 13, 2002, less than a month after the death of Jonas Savimbi, the Angolan government announced
a unilateral cease-fire. Talks which began later than month produced a peace agreement which held as of the
end of 2003.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Hare, Paul (1998).

Angola’s last best chance for Peace: An Insider’s Account of the Peace Process

. Washington,

DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.

•

James III, W. Martin (1992).

A Political History of the Civil War in Angola 1974-1990

. New Brunswick,

NJ: Transaction Publishers.

236

Conflict: Ethiopia vs. ONLF (conflict id 2330, dyad 1730)

Conflict Summary: The Ogaden region of Ethiopia, which has a majority Somali population, has historically
been an area of much conflict in that country. For years, armed groups have struggled on behalf of the
Ogaden for that region to secede from Ethiopia and to merge with Somalia (see conflict id 2330, dyad 1740).
In 1996, armed conflict broke out again when the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) declared war
against the Ethiopian government and attacked government positions. Conflict continued from 1996 through
the end of 2003, although the ONLF has not been able to accomplish much militarily. Additionally, the group
was afflicted by fractionalization, with one faction of the organization remaining committed to armed struggle
and another seeking to compete politically in the Somali region. The armed faction has worked with other
Ethiopian rebel groups such as the Oromo Liberation Front.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in June 1988, one faction of the ONLF broke off and merged
with the Ethiopian-Somali Democratic League to form a new political party, the Somali Democratic Party.
The other faction has rejected this move and is not affiliated with the political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the ONLF. However, the
group was largely marginal and was not able to accomplish much militarily.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

237

Conflict: Ethiopia and Cuba vs. WSLF (conflict id 2330, dyad 1740)

Conflict Summary: The Ogaden is a region of Ethiopia on the border with Somalia that is majority Somali.
For decades, there have been armed groups in the Ogaden pushing for the secession of that region and its
merger with Somalia. Additionally, when Somalia became independent in 1962, it made a key component of
its national constitution the desire to unite all the Somali people under one country (which would include
joining the Ogaden with Somalia). In the early 1970s, the military dictator in Somali began clamoring for
Ogaden to break off from Ethiopia and a rebel group, the Western Somali Liberation Front (WSLF) formed
and began organizing to launch an attack. In 1976, the combined forces of the Somali army and the WSLF
attacked into Ethiopia, and were able to achieve some initial success. However, the Soviet Union, which had
been a supporter of Somalia, switched allegiance and supported Ethiopia instead, and the Ethiopian army,
backed up by Cuban soldiers, and supplied by Soviet weapons, was able to repel the Somali invasion. The
WSLF continued the armed struggle from 1978 to 1983, however, without the direct support of the Somali
army they were overpowered by the Ethiopian army. Tension over the Somali region has continued, and
fighting continues to this day between another Somali rebel group and the Ethiopian government (see
conflict id 2330, dyad 1730), however, the prospects of the region successfully achieving secession from
Ethiopia are very low.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The WSLF was a military organization seeking the secession of the region, not a political organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in January 1978 that the WSLF forces were estimated at about
20,000 troops. At the same time, Keesing’s reports that there were at least 60,000 Ethiopian troops deployed
in the Ogaden.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

238

Conflict: Indonesia vs. Fretelin (conflict id 2340)

Conflict Summary:

This conflict is best described in two periods. In the first, there was a war between the Indonestian military
and Fretelin over the status of East Timor. In the second period, the East Timorese continued to attack the
government, but at a much lower level of intensity, and they focused more on a campaign to gain
international recognition.

Period 1 (1975-1984)
The Eastern half of the island of Timor was a Portugese colony until 1975. In 1974, following a military coup
in Lisbao, the new Portugese government committed itself to pulling out of all of its colonies. As
independence approached, a number of Timorese groups mobilized to gain power in the province, the most
vocal of which was Fretelin, an organization with a Marxist orientation. The Indonesian government argued
that a communist-controlled island in the archipelago would be too great a threat, and used that threat to
justify an invasion of East Timor in 1975. The invasion was followed by massive civilian atrocities, as
hundreds of thousands of Timorese lost their lives. From 1975 until the mid 1980s, war continued between
Fretelin and the Indonesian army as the former struggle for the independence of the island, but the
Indonesian army was able to gain the upper hand and by 1985, most of Fretelin’s fighting force had been
defeated.

Period 2 (1985-1998)
In the second phase of the conflict, Fretelin continued to push for independence for East Timor. However,
instead of pushing their goals through large-scale conflict, as they had for a decade, the group focused on
lower intensity conflict and on obtaining international support for the Timorese cause. In the late 1980s and
early 1990s, as the threat of communism receded, international pressure on Indonesia to pull out of the
territory increased. The government in Jakarta continued to refuse, however, the massive economic and
political crisis that afflicted Indonesia in 1998 presented an opportunity for the opposition forces in East
Timor and the region saw large-scale protests for independence. Fighting broke out between the protesters
and the Indonesian army until an international force intervened to prevent the army from massacring pro-
independence civilians. In 1999, a referendum was held in which the vast majority of the Timorese population
voted for secession.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Fretelin is an organization that has fought for the independence of East Timor through armed struggle, rather
than politically.

Period 1

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 30,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Onwar.com estimated that in the period leading up to the mid-1980s, Fretelin had about 30,000 troops.

Period 2

Rebestimate: 2,000
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 4,000

240

Conflict: Morocco and Mauritania vs. POLISARIO (conflict id 2350)

Conflict Summary: The Western Sahara is a region of Northern Africa that was colonized by Spain in the
1800s and was granted independence in 1975. The Saharawi population of Western Sahara is primarily
nomadic and is ethnically different from the population of Morocco. Upon independence in 1975, Morocco
and Mauritania laid claim to parts of Western Sahara. Several insurgent groups rose up to challenge these
claims, and the dominant group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguiet el Hamara and Rio de Oro
(POLISARIO), declared the independence of the region. POLISARIO was able to gain control of a large area
of Western Saharan territory, although the Moroccan army seized the major population and economic centers
of the region. Throughout the late 1970s and 1980s, POLISARIO waged guerilla warfare against the
Moroccan army (Mauritania renounced its claim to part of Western Sahara in 1979), but the army was slowly
able to gain the upper hand. By 1989, the Moroccan government controlled much of the territory and many
Saharawis had been driven into exile in Algeria. Although there has been low level fighting since 1989, this
fighting has never reached a high enough level for the dispute to be classified as an armed conflict. The final
status of the territory, however, is still very much in dispute.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

POLISARIO has declared itself as the official government of Western Sahara, and is recognized as such by
many countries in the international community.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1989, POLISARIO had between 5,000 and 10,000 troops.
Onwar.com estimates that, over the course of the conflict, POLISARIO had 15,000 troops. These numbers
are in comparison to about 150,000 troops possessed by the Moroccan army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Western Sahara
Effterrcont: moderate

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in the initial stages of the conflict POLISARIO controlled much
of Western Sahara. The Moroccan army responded by seizing the most important parts of the region and
then slowly extending its zone of control so that by 1989, it controlled about 90% of the region.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Onwar.com

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

241

Conflict: Mozambique vs. Renamo (conflict id 2360)

Conflict Summary: Mozambique gained independence from Portugal in 1975. Unlike in neighboring Angola,
only one insurgent group presented a real challenge to colonialism, and in the aftermath of independence,
that group, the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO) took power. After independence,
FRELIMO made two policy decisions that would have major affects on the subsequent civil war. First, the
government aligned itself with the Soviet Union and began pursuing socialist policies like the collectivization
of agriculture. Second, FRELIMO began providing support to the African National Congress in South Africa
(see conflict id 2510) and Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union in Rhodesia (see conflict id
2220).

FRELIMO’s support of their rebels led the governments of South Africa and Rhodesia to see

Mozambique as a threat to their stability and in 1976, they worked together to create an organization to
challenge the government. That organization, the National Mozambican Resistance (RENAMO) started an
armed struggle against the government in 1977. The group was entirely reliant on foreign funding and arms,
however, it was able to gather some domestic support with its anti-government position, particularly in the
rural areas that had been badly affected by policies such as the collectivization of agriculture. The conflict
between FRELIMO and RENAMO intensified through the late 1970s and by 1980, the country was
immersed in full-scale civil war which would continue for 12 years.

In the 1980s, the government realized the inability of the army to defeat the rebels militarily and

began looking for other ways to combat them. In the early 1980s, following the end of the Rhodesian civil
war and the beginning of majority rule in Zimbabwe, the governments of Mozambique and Zimbabwe signed
an agreement whereby the Zimbabwean military would intervene to cut off RENAMO from parts of
Mozambique (Zimbabwe was trying to keep a route open to the coast without having to go through South
Africa). In 1985, Mozambique signed an agreement with South Africa in which they committed to stop
supporting each other’s rebel groups—Mozambique followed through on its end of the deal and ended
support to the ANC, however, South Africa did not stop funneling support to RENAMO. The conflict
continued at a high level of intensity but at a relative stalemate throughout the late 1980s, with RENAMO
unable to gain control of the capital but FRELIMO unable to defeat RENAMO. In the late 1980s, the end of
the Cold War brought increasing pressure on the parties to negotiate and a decline in the aid provided to
each. In 1990, direct talks between FRELIMO and RENAMO began in Rome and in 1992, a comprehensive
peace agreement calling for power sharing in government and the military was reached and the conflict was
terminated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

RENAMO was a military organization, funded almost exclusively by foreign patrons, that positioned itself in
opposition to the government, but did not develop a political organization of its own until the conflict ended.

Rebestimate: 20,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 22,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of RENAMO: in 1987: 20,000; in 1998: 22,000; in 1989, 1990 and 1991: 10,000-20,000; in 1992: 21,000.
These estimates are in comparison to the following estimates for FRELIMO: In 1987 and 1988: 25,000; in
1989: 37,000; in 1990: 60,000; in 1991: 36,000; in 1992: 62,000.

terrcont: yes
terrname: Parts of rural Northern Mozambique

242

effterrcont: low

FRELIMO’s main support was in southern Mozambique and in the urban centers of the country. In the rural
and northern areas of the country, RENAMO was able to exert a level of control. However, Venâncio and
Chan (1998) report that, “In contrast to other successful guerilla movements, RENAMO has not displayed
any capacity to substitute the infrastructure it destroyed with a parallel civil administration able to care for the
populations of the so-called ‘liberated areas’. It seems to have lacked the personnel, the know-how and the
finances required to set up any kind of administrative structure” (p. 12).

Newenddate: 10/4/1992

On October 4, 1992, RENAMO and FRELIMO signed a peace accord in Rome.

Sources:

•

Venâncio, Moisés and Stephen Chan (1998).

War and Peace in Mozambique

. New York: St. Martin’s

Press, Inc.

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

243

Conflict: Afghanistan vs. Various Organizations (conflict id 2370)

Conflict Summary: Afghanistan has been one of the most conflict-torn countries in the world in the last three
decades. Communist-backed coups in 1973 and 1978 produced a secular communist Afghan government that
was opposed by many of the country’s Islamic residents. Additionally, the presence of strong Soviet support
for the regime led to much opposition. In 1978, an insurgency broke out, led primarily by Afghans who had
organized at Islamic schools in Pakistan. In 1979, the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, and they would stay
for another ten years. There were several separate insurgent groups battling the Soviets and the communist
government, and they were collectively referred to as the “Mujahideen.” The Mujahideen were unable to
completely defeat the Soviet army, which overpowered them, however, they were able to make it costly for
the Soviets to remain in Afghanistan. And in 1989, the Soviet army withdrew.

With the withdrawal of the Soviets, many international observers expected the Afghan government

to be short-lived, however, despite armed opposition by the Mujahideen and an attempted military coup in
1990, President Najibullah was able to maintain control through 1992. By that time, however, the insurgency
had reached a very high-level and opposition within Najibullah’s own government had grown and on April
15, 1992, he was removed by members of his own party and a new government was established. The new
government only lasted a week, however, before it was removed by an alliance of Mujahideen factions and
members of the military based in the north. A power-sharing government led by the leader of Jamiat i-Islami
was established, however, divisions within the Mujahideen alliance quickly emerged and within months there
was fighting between factions of the Mujahideen, primarily Jamiat i-Islamic (which was now the government
of Afghanistan) and Hezb-i-Islami.

For several years the country was riven with factional fighting and was largely lacking a functioning

government. In 1995, however, a new group, the Taliban, was successful in gaining control of large swaths of
territory and in September 1996, the Taliban captured Kabul. They quickly imposed a strict interpretation of
Islamic law and reestablished order throughout much of the country.

The various groups opposed to the Taliban formed a new alliance, the United Islamic Front for the

Salvation of Afghanistan (UIFSA), which was based in the north of the country and was commonly referred
to as the Northern Alliance. Besides controlling some territory in northern Afghanistan the UIFSA was
unable to accomplish much against the Taliban until in late 1991, the United States and other nations began
supporting the group in its effort to overthrow the Taliban. Facing aerial bombardment by United States and
other North Atlantic Treaty Organization armies, the Taliban quickly crumbled and in November 2001, the
UIFSA took Kabul.

A coalition government made up of representatives of the various ethnicities of Afghanistan was

established and supported by a large foreign military presence. The Taliban was largely defeated and in 2002,
the conflict was largely latent. However, by 2003, the Taliban had regrouped and had reemerged as a fighting
force dedicated to overthrowing the coalition government and restoring control of the country. The conflict
remained ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. Jamiat-i-Islami

Rebpolwing: no

Jamiat-i-Islami was an Islamic fundamentalist organization opposed to the secular communist government of
1978-1992 and did not participate in the domestic Afghani political process.

Rebestimate: 12,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 55,000
Rebstrength: weaker

244

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of Jamiat-i-Islami: in
1989: 12,000; in 1990: less than 12,000; in 1991: 155,000 for all the groups in the Mujahideen, but no
individual estimate is given for Jamiat-i-Islami; in 1992: less than 10,000. These forces were clearly weaker
than the Afghan government when it was supported by the Soviet army.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1978

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Afghanistan and Jamiat-i-Islami first
reached 25 battledeaths in September 1978.

Newendate: 4/28/1992

On April 28, 1992, Jamiat-i-Islami took Kabul and became the government of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan vs. Hezb-i-Islami

This dyadic conflict is best described in two periods: one from 1978-1992 in which Hezb-i-Islami battled the
communist Afghan government which was backed by the Soviet Union (until 1989), and the second from
1992-1995 in which the group battled the new government formed by another Mujahideen faction, Jamiat-i-
Islami.

Period 1: 1978-1992

Rebpolwing: no

Hezb-i-Islami was an Islamic fundamentalist organization military opposed to the secular communist
government of 1978-1992 and the subsequent Jamiat-i-Islami government and did not participate in the
domestic Afghani political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the available sources provided any indication as to the number of troops possessed by Hezb-i-Islami
in the period when they battled the Soviet-backed Afghan government. However, it is clear that the group
was weaker than the Soviet army deployed in Afghanistan.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1978

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Afghan government and Hezb-i-Islami
reached 25 battledeaths in September, 1978.

Newendate: 4/28/1992

On April 28, 1992, the Afghan government was overthrown and a new government led by Jumiat-i-Islami
took power.

Period 2: 1992-1995

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1996, Hezb-i-Islami had about 50,000 troops.

245

Newstartdate: 6/1/1992

For a couple of months after the new government took power there was no conflict between the
Government of Afghanistan and Hezb-i-Islami. However, Hezb-i-Islami did not recognize the Jumiat-i-Islami
government and by the end of June 1992, armed conflict had erupted again.

Newendate: 12/31/1995

In late 1995, Hezb-i-Islami, facing an increasing threat from the growing Taliban movement, signed a peace
treaty with the Jumiat-i-Islami government. Some conflict continued but by the end of 1995, the conflict had
largely died down.

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. Hezb-i-Wahdat

Rebpolwing: no

Hezb-i-Wahdat was an alliance of several Shiia Iranian parties that formed in 1989 to coordinate the
overthrow of the Afghan government once the Soviet army pulled out.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 86,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1993-1995, Hezb-i-Wahdat had approximately 86,000
troops.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that Hezb-i-Wahdat formed in 1989, it is not clear when the dyadic
conflict crossed 25 battledeaths.

Newendate: 12/31/1985

In January 1985, Hezb-i-Wahdat signed a peace agreement with the government. Some conflict continued but
by the end of the year the conflict had been largely terminated.

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. Military Faction (of 1990)

Brief background: On March 6, 1990, the Afghan Defense Minister, in coordination with Hezb-i-Islami,
attempted a coup d’etat against the President. The bulk of the army stayed loyal, however, and the coup was
unsuccessful.

Rebpolwing: no

The attempted coup was led by the Defense Minister and he did not try to gain influence through the Afghan
political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that participated in the coup attempt.
However, it is clear that the majority of the Afghan army stayed loyal to the President.

246

Newendate: 3/8/1990

Following the coup attempt there was fighting for a few days in Kabul, but by March 8 it had largely died
down.

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. Military Faction (of 1992)

Brief background: On April 15, 1992, as Jamiat-i-Islami and Hazb-i-Wahdat were on the outskirts of Kabul
and looked to be in a strong position to take the city, members of President Najibullah’s ruling party, backed
up by the armed forces, overthrow the President and entered into negotiations with the rebels.

Rebpolwing: no

The coup d’etat was carried out by insiders in the government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that participated in the coup attempt.
However, it does appear that a majority of the military supported the coup.

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. Taliban

This conflict is best addressed in two periods. The first covers the period from the formation of the Taliban
in 1994 to its seizing power in Kabul in 1996. The second period covers the resurgence of the group in 2003
and its opposition to the United States backed coalition government.

Period 1: 1994-1996

Rebpolwing: no

The Taliban was formed by Islamic students trained in Pakistan and did not compete in the Afghan political
arena.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 25,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1995, the Taliban had less than 25,000 troops and in 1996, it
had 25,000 troops. These estimates are in comparison to 60,000 troops possessed by the Afghan army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The Taliban was led by Mullah Omar Mohammad and had a clear command structure.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Southern Afghanistan
Effterrcont: moderate

247

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by the end of 1995, the Taliban controlled 10 of Afghanistan’s 30
provinces. Within these provinces the group sought to overthrow warlords and remove existing political
parties and implement Islamic law.

Newstartdate: 2/1/1995

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Taliban and the government reached 25
battledeaths in February 1995. No more specific date is given.

Newendate: 9/28/1996

On September 28, 1996, the Taliban took control of Kabul.

Period 2: 2003

Rebpolwing: no

The Taliban in this period exists as simply a military opposition to the coalition government and does not
present a political opposition.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 2003 the Taliban had between 1,000 and 2,000 troops.

Newstartdate: 1/1/2003

It is not clear when the dyadic conflict in this new phase reached 25 battledeaths, it happened sometime in
2003.

Newendate: ongoing

The conflict between the Taliban and the Afghan government was ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Dyad: Afghanistan vs. UIFSA

Rebpolwing: no

The United Islamic Front for Salvation of Afghanistan was established as a group to coordinate military
opposition to the Taliban and was not a political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 115,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1998, the UIFSA had about 115,000 troops. In 1999, the
Taliban government was estimated to have about 200,000 troops at its disposal.

Newstartdate: 10/13/1996

249

Conflict: India vs. Tipuri (conflict id 2390)

Conflict Summary: The Tipuri are a tribe that lives in what is now northeastern India, near the border with
Bangladesh. The Tipuri are historically a majority in the region, however, since independence the Indian
government has encouraged migration of Bengali speakers into the region. This migration has made the
Tipuri an ethnic and economic minority in the region and has led to much grievance. In 1978, the Tripuri
National Volunteer Force (TNV) was formed as the first armed insurgent group pressing for Tripuri
demands, including greater autonomy and the restoration of a Tripuri majority in the region. The TNV waged
ten years of armed struggle, although it was not able to accomplish much militarily. In 1988, the group signed
an accord with the Indian government which increased the representation of Tripuri in the state government
and restored some tribal land.

Although the TNV accepted this agreement, other Tripuri groups were not satisfied with the

concessions they received and in 1990 armed conflict broke out again with the formation of the All Tripura
Tribal Front (ATTF). The ATTF was an organization promoting greater autonomy for Tripuri. In 1991, it
was joined by another major rebel group, the National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT). The ATTF and
NLFT waged armed conflict against the Indian government through 1993, when a left-wing pro-Tripura party
came to power. Following this election, the ATTF signed an agreement to surrender, and some of its
members did, however many factions of the organization continued fighting. Additionally, the NLFT stayed
committed to armed struggle and the conflict continued from 1993 to 2003 at a low-level of intensity. No
serious negotiations have taken place between the Indian government and the rebels.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: India vs. TNV

Rebpolwing: no

The TNV was a militant organization that pressed for greater Tripuri autonomy through armed struggle,
rather than politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources identified gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the TNV.
However, it is clear that the group was substantially weaker than the Indian military.

Dyad: India vs. ATTF

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that, “In 1993 the left-wing party widely accused of being the key
force behind the ATTF's campaign of violence came into power.”

Rebestimate: 900
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 1,600
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of the ATTF: In 1992
and 1993: 1,600; in 1995 and 1996: 200; in 1997: 150; in 1998: 150-200; in 1999 and 2000: 200-300; in 2001:

250

300-600; in 2002 and 2003: 500-600. This is in comparison to over a million troops possessed by the Indian
army (although not all of those troops are deployed in Tripura).

Newstartdate: 10/12/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the India-ATTF dyad first reached 25 battledeaths on October
12, 1992.

Dyad: India vs. NLFT

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the NLFT is “known to be associated with the opposition
Indigenous National Party of Tripura.”

Rebestimate: 800
Rebestlow: 150
Rebesthigh: 1,500
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of the NLFT: In 1995
and 1996: 150; in 1997, 1998 and 1999: 150-500; in 2000: 150-800; in 2001: 825-1500; in 2002: 800-1500; in
2003: 800. These estimates are in comparison to over a million troops possessed by the Indian army
(although not all of those troops are deployed in Tripura).

Cencont: no

The NLFT has splintered and has two competing factions both claiming to represent the real organization.

Newstartdate: 10/31/1995

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the India-NLFT dyad first reached 25 battledeaths on October
31, 1995.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

251

Conflict: Nicaragua vs. Sandinistas, Nicaragua vs. Contras (conflict id 2400)

Conflict Summary:

This conflict is best described in two periods, the first with the Sandinistas struggling to take power in
Nicaragua; the second, with the contras struggling against the Sandinista government.

Period 1 (Nicaragua vs. FSLN)

From 1932-1979, Nicaragua was run by a dictatorship led by the Somoza family. The Somoza

dictatorship received a high level of support from foreign actors, such as the United States. In the 1970s, the
Somoza dictatorship became increasingly repressive as economic recession increased domestic Nicaraguan
opposition to the regime. This repression also led to U.S. pressure on President Anastasio Somoza to allow
some opening of the political process.

The declining economy and drop in domestic and international support for Somoza increased the

opportunity for opponents of the regime to mobilize. In the late 1970s, this opposition generally took two
forms: a nonviolent opposition, made up of various opposition political parties, and a violent opposition,
dominated by the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN). The FSLN adopted a strategy of guerilla
warfare to overthrow the regime, and initially was not able to achieve much success. However the group
mobilized more forces through the late 1970s, the regime continued to lose both domestic and international
support, and by mid-1978, the FSLN controlled parts of northern Nicaragua and represented a significant
challenge to Somoza’s regime. Under U.S. pressure, Somoza agreed to negotiate with the rebels but was
unwilling to accede to their demands, however, by 1979, the regime was overwhelmed and Somoza and his
supports fled the country. The FSLN took power in Managua and its leader, Daniel Ortega, became President
of the country in elections in 1984 that were endorsed by the international community as “free and fair.”

Period 2 (Nicaragua vs. Contras)

Most countries recognized the new FSLN-led government, however, the United States, which

opposed any Marxist-oriented governments in Latin America, failed to do so. In fact, in the 1980s, the United
States began supporting Nicaraguan counter-revolutionaries, or “contras.” The contras were primarily
members of the old Somozan-era National Guard that had fled to Honduras when his regime had been
overthrown. With the support of the United States Central Intelligence Agency the Contras in 1983 were able
to launch an armed struggle against the government of Daniel Ortega. Despite the support from the United
States and the willingness of the Honduran government to allow the contras to launch incursions into
Nicaragua from its territory, the contras were not able to achieve much military success against a Nicaraguan
government armed by the Soviet Union and Cuba. By the late 1980s, the contras had realized that the military
campaign was a failure, and in 1987-1989 the parties reached agreements that led to the disarmament of the
contras and to new national elections in 1990.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Nicaragua vs. FSLN

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Early in its armed struggle, the FSLN was loosely affiliated with the Frente Amplio Opositor, an opposition
political movement. In 1979, the FSLN formed its own political organization, the Movimiento Pueblo Unido.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

252

Bulmer-Thomas (1990) writes that the FSLN had about 3,000 troops by the end of 1978, as compared to
10,000 troops possessed by the government.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: moderate

Shortly after its formation, the FSLN split into three factions. However, by the height of its armed struggle, in
late 1978, it had reformed into one organization led by Daniel Ortega.

Mobcap: high

The FSLN had a high level of popular support, as evidenced by its great success in internationally endorsed
elections after the conflict ended.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Northern Nicaragua
Effterrcont: moderate

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the FSLN controlled parts of Northern Nicaragua in 1978 and
1979.

Dyad: Nicaragua vs. FDN/Contras

Rebpolwing: no

The Contras were a group of former members of the national guard opposed to the Sandinista-led
government and did not form a political organization.

Rebestimate: 13,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1985, the contras had about 10,000 troops. The Stockholm
International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the number of troops possessed by
the contras: In 1987 and1988: 12,000-17,000; in 1989: 12,000. These numbers are in comparison to more than
70,000 troops in the Nicaraguan army.

Newstartdate: 2/19/1983

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict reached 25 battledeaths on February 19, 1983.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Bulmer-Thomas, Victor (1990). “Nicaragua since 1930” in Leslie Bethel, Ed.

The Cambridge History of

Latin America Vol. VII: Latin America since 1930: Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean

. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

253

Conflict: Somalia vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2410, dyad 1870)

Conflict Summary: On April 9, 1978 a group of Somali military officers led by Colonel Abdulaahi Yusuf
attempted a coup against President Siad Barre. The officers were unhappy that Barre had ignored military
advice from the army in the disastrous Somalia war against Ethiopia in the Ogaden, a region of Western
Ethiopia with a majority Somali population. Somalia had been handily defeated in that war and Barre, who
had been quite popular prior to the war, had seen new enemies emerge in its aftermath. The April 9, 1978
coup attempt was quickly defeated and several military officers were subsequently tried and executed or
imprisoned. Yusuf and several of the other ringleaders escaped to Kenya and continued their opposition to
Barre in exile.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The attempted coup was led by disaffected military officers and not by a political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

It is not clear how many soldiers supported the coup attempt. However, the force was no match for the
Somali army.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

254

Conflict: Somalia vs. Various Organizations (conflict id 2410, dyads 1880, 1890)

Conflict Summary: This conflict is best described in three periods.

Period 1: 1978-1991

When Somalia became independent in 1960, it had great promise to be one of the most prosperous

and peaceful countries in Africa. Instead, it has been one of the most conflictual. The country was democratic
for the first nine years of its existence, but that democracy was plagued by corruption. In 1969, a military
coup brought General Siad Barre to power, and he would remain president of the country until 1991. In
1977-1978, Somalia went to war with Ethiopia over the Ogaden, a region of Ethiopia that is majority Somali.
The war was a disaster, with the Somali army being soundly defeated by Ethiopia and Barre’s regime suffered
a major drop in public approval in its aftermath.

The roots of the Somali civil war came in 1978 when a coup d’etat against Barre failed. The leader of

the coup, Colonel Abdulaahi Yusuf, escaped to Ethiopia and formed a rebel group, the Somali Salvation
Democratic Front (SSDF) to challenge Barre’s regime. As Barre saw internal criticism mount and felt
pressure from armed groups, he turned increasingly to members of his own and closely allied clan families to
hold important government and military positions. This policy led to the emergence of even more armed
groups to challenge Barre’s regime. Each of these rebel groups was closely allied to one clan or clan family.

In 1981, the Somali National Movement (SNM) was formed. The SNM was a group made up

primarily of northern Somalis (members of the Issac clan family) and in 1982 it began waging an armed
struggle against the government. The military responded with massive retaliation, and for a while was able to
overwhelm the rebellion. However, by the end of the 1980s, the power of Barre’s regime had weakened and
popular disapproval of him had reached such a high level that almost the entire country was immersed in full-
scale civil war.

In 1989, two new major rebel groups formed. The United Somali Congress (USC) was an

organization representing the Hawiye clan that presented a major armed challenge to the Barre regime. The
Somali Patriotic Movement (SPM) was made up of members of the Ogadeen clan family and also began
challenging Barre. From 1989 to 1991 these various organizations worked together and on January 29, 1991,
Barre was overthrown.

Period 2: 1991-1996

The alliance between the various rebel groups broke down within days after the fall of Barre. First,

the USC split over the question of who would rule Somalia: Ali Mahdi Mohamed was declared president by
some of the key ranking members but General Mohamed Farah Aydeed rejected that decision and took his
faction of the USC to war against the new “government.” The SNM and SPM also rejected the new
government, the SNM responded by declaring an independent Republic of Somaliland in the north and the
SPM continued to wage armed struggle against Ali Mahdi’s government.

The civil war which broke out after this war lasted through 1996 as the various organizations sought

to gain control over the country. During this period, the United Nations and United States deployed a
massive humanitarian mission to facilitate the distribution of aid, a mission which ended when 18 U.S.
soldiers were killed and their bodies were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu on international
television. In late 1996, the various Somali parties agreed to a cease-fire, although it was not upheld, but the
conflict remained at a relatively low level of intensity from 1997 to 2000. Throughout this period Somalia was
a state in name only, with the country being divided between different warlords and lacking any real
governmental apparatus.

Period 3: 2001-2002

In late 2000, Somali clan elders met in Djibouti and elected members to a Transitional National

Government (TNG) that was to be the new government of the country. The TNG did not have much more

255

success than the previous ten years of attempts to form a government in Mogadishu. In 2001, a set of
opposition groups formed a new rebel group, the Somali Reconciliation and Restoration Council (SRRC) to
challenge the TNG. Fighting continued for a year-and-a-half at a relatively low level until on October 27,
2002, a cease-fire was signed between the TNG and the opposition groups. As of the end of 2003, the
conflict is still not resolved and Somalia still does not have a government, but there is not enough fighting to
label it a civil war either.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Somalia vs. (Barre) SSDF

Rebpolwing: no

The SSDF was a movement formed in exile by an ex-military officer to challenge the government of Siad
Barre. It was not a political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1200
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 1989 and 1990 the SSDF had 1200 troops. This number was
in comparison to more than 60,000 troops possessed by the Somali army.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the SSDF had stopped waging armed struggle on a large-scale by
the end of 1991.

Dyad: Somalia (Barre) vs. SNM

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Somali National Movement had both a political and a military wing. The military wing helped to
overthrow Barre, and the political wing set up de-facto political control in northern Somalia. In 1991, after
the overthrow of Barre, the SNM declared an independent Republic of Somaliland, and has functioned as the
government of that Republic since.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the Somali National Movement: In 1989 and 1990: 10,000; in 1991: 5,000-10,000. These troop numbers are in
comparison to the following estimates for the Somali army: In 1989: 61,000; in 1990: 65,000; in 1991: 30,000.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

The SNM declared northern Somalia independent in 1991 and, although the Republic of Somaliland was not
recognized by the USC, the two groups did not continue fighting after 1991.

Dyad: Somalia (Barre) vs. SPM

256

Rebpolwing: no

The Somali Patriotic Movement was a movement of Ogadeen former officers unhappy with the Barre regime
and was not a political organization.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the Somali Patriotic Movement: In 1989: 3,000; in 1990: 1,000-3,000; in 1991: 5,000-10,000. This is in
comparison to the following estimates for the Somali army: In 1989: 61,000; in 1990: 65,000; in 1991: 30,000.

Dyad: Somalia (Barre) vs. USC

Rebpolwing: no

The USC did have both a political and a military organization. However, the political organization was in exile
and did not play any political role within Somalia. Rather, the only function of the USC prior to the
overthrow of Barre was as a military organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1990, the USC had 1,000 troops. This
estimate was in comparison to 60,000 troops for the Somali government.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The USC did have an executive body that was officially in charge of the organization. However, the
organization was fractionalized and within days after accomplishing its goal of overthrowing Barre had split
into two factions.

Newendate: 1/29/1991

On January 29, 1991, Siad Barre was overthrown and the USC became, effectively, the new government of
Somalia, although the civil war did not end, it just went into a new phase with other rebel groups challenging
the USC.

Dyad: Somalia (USC) vs. USC Faction

Rebpolwing: no

The USC-faction challenged Mahdi’s “government” militarily but not as a political organization.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: parity

257

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the USC-faction: In 1992: 2,000-6,000; in 1993: no estimate; in 1994 and 1995: 10,000; in 1996: 1,000. These
numbers are in comparison to the following estimates for the government: In 1992: 2,000-6,000; in 1993: no
estimate, in 1994 and 1995: 10,000; in 1996: no estimate. The USC was very evenly divided between these two
factions throughout the civil war.

Newendate: 12/31/1996

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the USC Faction and the government did
not reach 25 battledeaths in a year again after 1996.

Dyad: Somalia (TNG) vs. SRRC

Rebpolwing: no

The SRRC was an organization of opposition groups to the Transitional National Government but did not
represent a political movement on its own.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the troop strength of the SRRC.

Dyad: Somalia (Barre) vs. Military Faction

Believe this Dyad is a mistake, could not find the military faction referred to.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Prunier, Gerard (1995).

Somalia: Civil War, Intervention and Withdrawal 1990-1995

. United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees Report.

258

Conflict: Equatorial Guinea vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2430)

Conflict Summary: On August 3, 1979 the Deputy Defence Minister, Lt.-Col. Teodoro Obiang Nguema
Mbasogo, led a group of officers in their overthrow of President Macias Nguema. Nguema had ruled the
country since independence from Spain in 1968 and had accumulated one of the worst human rights records
of any African leader. Mbasogo’s forces quickly took the capital and established a new government and,
fifteen days later, caught Nguema near his hometown of Mongomo. Nguema and several of his top
governmental officials were subsequently tried and executed.

Rebpolwing: no

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the main opposition party in Equatorial Guinea was hesitant
to support the new government in the aftermath of the coup d’etat, and it appears that the coup originated
solely in the military and not in a political movement.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

None of the sources make any reference to the number of troops that supported Mbasogo. However, his
forces were able to take control of the capital quickly.

Newendate: 8/18/1979

On August 18, 1979, former President Nguema was captured near his hometown.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

259

Conflict: Iran vs. Mujahadeen e Khalq (conflict id 2440)

Conflict Summary: Mujahadeen e Khalq is an organization that has challenged the Iranian government for
over thirty years. Formed in the 1960s, the organization is a radical Shi’i Islamic organization that originally
formed to use guerilla warfare to challenge the Shah of Iran. There was a brief period of peace following the
Iranian revolution and the establishment of the Islamic Republic, however, disagreements between
Mujahadeen e Khalz and the ruling clergy over the alleged rigging of elections quickly led the organization to
renew the armed struggle. The group supported Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war, which hurt their popular support
within Iran, and in 1987, it moved operations to Iraq, although it continued to attack into Iran. The conflict
was never officially resolved, however, since 2001 the conflict has not flared up and the organization has
allowed the United States occupation in Iraq to disarm it.

Notes on Coding

rebpolwing: explicit link
rebpolwinglegal: yes

One of the initial disagreements between Mujahadeen e Khalq and the Iranian revolutionary government was
over the rigging of elections.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 4,500
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of Mujahadeen e Khalq:
in 1991, 1992, and 1993: 4,500; in 1997, 1999 and 2000: 15,000; in 2001: 6,000-8000. These estimates are in
comparison to over half a million troops possessed by the Iranian government.

Armsproc: medium

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Mujahadeen e Khalq received arms from the Iraqi government.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

260

Conflict: Iran vs. APCO (conflict id 2450)

Conflict Summary: The province of Khuzistan in Iran has a population that is ethnically distinct from the
overall Irani population. There is some dispute over whether Arabs constitute a majority or a sizable minority
in Khuzistan, however, in any case much of the population of that province is different from the Persian
population of Iran. Additionally, Khuzistan is one of the richest provinces in Iran since it is where much of
the country’s oil wealth is concentrated. In the late 1970s, the Arab Political and Cultural Organization
(APCO) began lobbying for greater autonomy for the province within Iran and for the population of the
province to receive a greater proportion of the oil revenues. The Iranian government did agree to allow
APCO to set up provincial councils in the province, however, Arab nationalists were still unhappy with the
presence of Irani revolutionary security forces in the province. In 1979 and 1980, there were several violent
clashes between APCO and the Iranian government, including the bombing of oil pipelines and APCO
seizing the Iranian embassy in London and holding the embassy workers there hostage. By the end of 1980,
the conflict had largely died down.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

APCO was allowed to set up provincial councils in Khuzistan province.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops that supported APCO’s demands,
however, it is clear that the group was considerably weaker than the Irani army.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk

261

Conflict: Saudi Arabia vs. Juhayman Movement (conflict id 2460)

Conflict Summary: On November 20, 1979, about 200-300 armed fighters took control of the Grand Mosque
at Medina, Saudi Arabia, the holiest mosque in all of Islam. The fighters allegedly were supporters of
Juhayman al-'Utaybi, and wanted the congregation of the mosque to recognize him as a prophet who had
been prophesized in the 15

century. The Saudi government waited several days to respond because the

shedding of blood in a mosque was strictly forbidden by Islamic law. However, on November 25, the
supreme body of Islamic law temporarily lifted the ban on weapons in the mosque and the Saudi security
forces intervened. For the next eight days they battled with the fighters until on December 3, 1979, they had
completed regained control of the mosque.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Juhayman Movement was a religious movement and did not participate in Saudi domestic politics.

Rebestimate: 250
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: much weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events estimates that 200 to 300 armed fighters participated in the takeover of
the mosque.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: unclear

The group was led by Juhayman al-'Utaybi, but it is not clear how strong of control he exercised.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

262

Conflict: Liberia vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2470, dyad 1970)

Conflict Summary: On August 12, 1980, a group of junior military officers, led by Master Sergeant Doe, killed
Liberian President William Tolbert and took power. Tolbert was one of the descendants of American slaves
who had moved to Liberia, a group that only made up 5% of the population but dominated the economic
and social structure of the society. Doe became President and many members of the People’s Progressive
Party (PPP), a new opposition party that had experienced much harassment at the hands of the Tolbert
government, was given many cabinet positions.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

It is not clear that Doe and the junior officers who followed him were directly linked with the PPP. However,
the PPP was the main opposition party to President Tolbert and they were immediately incorporated into
Doe’s government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources gave any indication to the number of junior officers that supported Doe in the coup
d’etat.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

263

Conflict: Liberia vs. various rebel groups (conflict id 2470, dyads 1960, 1980, 2000)

Conflict Summary: This conflict is best described in two stages, the one leading up to Taylor’s ascension to
power in Liberia, and the period encompassing armed opposition to his rule.

Period 1

In late 1989, a group of about 500 armed rebels, led by Charles Taylor, entered Liberia from

neighboring Cote D’Ivoire and began challenging the regime of President Samuel Doe. The National Patriotic
Front of Liberia (NPFL) had some military success in gaining control of parts of Northern Liberia and also
committed massacres against the civilian population. In 1990, a faction of the NPFL led by Prince Yormie
Johnson split off and began fighting as the Independent National Patriotic Front of Liberia (INPFL). The
conflict between Doe’s government and Taylor and Johnson’s groups quickly reached a high level of intensity
and West African leaders saw Liberia as a threat to regional stability. In 1990, the Economic Community of
West African States (ECOWAS) Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) deployed a peacekeeping mission that was
designed to stop the fighting in Liberia. However, in September 1990, INPFL rebels in Monrovia captured
and killed Doe. A ceasefire agreement brokered by ECOWAS in 1991 quickly collapsed, and fighting
continued between the INPFL, NPFL and a new insurgent group made up of supporters of former President
Doe, the United Liberation Movement of Liberia for Democracy (ULIMO). In September 1992, the INPFL
dissolved and stopped pursuing the conflict. Fighting continued, however, between ECOMOG forces, the
NPFL, ULIMO, which had split into two factions, ULIMO-J and ULIMO-K. Despite continued fighting,
peace agreements in 1993, 1994, and 1995 led to the creation of a transitional government, with Taylor
occupying an important position. In 1996, the NPFL transitioned into a political party, the National Patriotic
Party, and in elections in 1997 Charles Taylor became President of Liberia.

Period 2

Despite Taylor’s ascension to the presidency, the conflict did not end in 1996. Supporters of former

President Doe continued to violently oppose Taylor’s presidency as part of ULIMO-J. In the subsequent
years, additional insurgent groups arose to challenge Taylor’s hold on power, the most prominent of which
was Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD), a group led by Liberian dissidents based in
Guinea. The conflict continued at a low level of intensity through 2003 when the attacks against Taylor’s
government increased. In 2003, LURD and other rebel groups launched attacks into Monrovia, and
negotiations in June 2003 in Accra, Ghana, produced a peace agreement. Taylor agreed to leave Liberia and
go into exile, and the international community agreed to send peacekeepers in 2004. The conflict was still
ongoing as of the end of 2003 but there was cautious optimism that it could be resolved soon.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Liberia vs. NPFL

Rebpolwing: no

After the signing of a peace agreement in August 1995, the NPFL changed into a political party, the National
Patriotic Party. However, prior to that time, the group competed militarily for power in Liberia, rather than
through the political process.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 14,000
Rebstrength: much stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the NPFL: In 1990: 200-14,000; in 1991: 7,000; in 1992-1995: 10,000. This is in comparison to the following

264

estimates for the Liberian government: in 1990: 5,000-7,800; in 1991: no estimate; in 1992: 250; in 1993: 200-
400; in 1994: 200-400; in 1995: no estimate. At the same time, the Liberian government was supported by the
following forces from ECOMOG: In 1990: 2,500-6,000; in 1991: 7,000; in 1992: 8,000-12,000; in 1993 and
1994: 15,000-17,000; in 1995: 7,000.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of Western Liberia
Effterrcont: moderate

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in October 1990 that the NPFL had established an interim
government at Gbarnga, Liberia, to control the areas of the country it controlled.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1989

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Liberian government and the NPFL
reached 25 battledeaths on December 31, 1989.

Newenddate: 8/26/1995

On August 19, 1995, the NPFL signed a cease-fire that was set to go into effect on week later. The NPFL
held to the ceasefire.

Dyad: Liberia vs. INPFL

Rebpolwing: no

The INPFL did participate temporarily in a transitional government brokered by ECOMOG. However, the
group only sought to achieve its control of the country through military force, rather than through a political
organization.

Rebestimate: 2,200
Rebestlow: 400
Rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1990 the INPFL had between 400
and 4,000 troops. After the defeat of Doe, the new Liberian government only had a few hundred troops and
was only able to stay in power because of support from ECOMOG.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: parts of Central Monrovia
Effterrcont: moderate

In the early 1990s, the INPFL was able to gain control of parts of central Monrovia. They were prevented
from capturing the whole capital in the aftermath of their assassination of Doe by the presence of ECOMOG
troops.

Newstartdate: 9/9/1990

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the INPFL and the Liberian government
reached 25 battledeaths on September 9, 1990.

265

Newendate: 9/30/1992

The INPFL dissolved in September 1992 and ceased to participate as a fighting force in the conflict.

Dyad: Liberia vs. Burkina Faso

Rebpolwing: Does Not Apply

Burkina Faso was a foreign state participant in the Liberian conflict and so did not participate in the domestic
political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports that Burkina Faso had 500 troops in Liberia in
1991.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1990

It is not clear when Burkina Faso intervened in the Liberian conflict, however it does appear that the group
was involved militarily in 1990.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

It is not clear when Burkina Faso stopped intervening directly in the Liberian conflict, however, it does
appear that the intervention had largely ended by the end of 1991.

Dyad: Liberia vs. ULIMO-J

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

ULIMO was made up of former members of Doe’s government and they participated in the transitional
government in 1994. For a brief period in 1996, the group waged armed conflict against the NPFL-led
transitional government, but in November 1996, they transformed into a political party, the Coalition Party
for all Liberian People.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 7,776
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in January 1997 that ULIMO had reported that they had 7,776
fighters to the organization put in charge of disarmament, demobilization and reintegration in Liberia.

Dyad: Liberia vs. LURD

Rebpolwing: no

LURD was a rebel group opposed to Taylor’s regime that received support from Guinea and Sierra Leone.
They only opposed Taylor’s regime militarily and not politically.

Rebestimate: 6,500
Rebestlow: 3,000

266

Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates the LURD had between 3,000 and 10,000 troops in 2003. This
number is in comparison to 7,000 to 15,000 troops for the Liberian army.

Armsproc: moderate

LURD received support, including arms, from Guinea and Sierra Leone.

Newstartdate: 1/1/2000

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between LURD and the Liberian government first
reached 25 battledeaths sometime in 2000, but did not give more specifics.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

267

Conflict: Spain vs. ETA (conflict id 2480)

Conflict Summary: The Basque country is in northern Spain along the border with France. The Basques are a
minority within Spain that speak a different language and that have a long history of opposition to centralized
Spanish rule. In the early 1960s, a militant Basque separatist movement developed, primarily led by the
organization Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA). The ETA is primarily a terrorist organization that targets
Spanish government political and security personnel. Since the early 1960s, the ETA has waged a low-level
assassination and terror campaign against the Spanish government. The government has granted the Basque
region a large-degree of autonomy but has been unwilling to consider the independence of the region, which
is the main demand the rebels are making. The government and ETA have also been at polar opposites on
the issue of negotiations: with the government refusing to negotiate a political agreement until the violence
has stopped and the ETA refusing to lay down their arms until a political agreement is in place. The conflict
continued at a low-level of intensity through 2003.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The ETA has a political wing that competes in Basque regional elections. Keesing’s Record of World Events
in October 1998 reported that this political wing was Euskal Herritarrok, and had previously been named
Herri Batasuna.

Rebestimate: 550
Rebestlow: 50
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in the mid-1990s the ETA was estimated to have about 50 armed
members, with a “base” of 3,000 members. However it also reported that there were about 500 ETA
members in jail, these 500 were presumably involved in the conflict at some point. In any case, the
organization is substantially smaller than the Spanish military and police forces.

Mobcap: low

The ETA is a relatively small organization and, although independence is popular among the Basque, the
ETA’s political wing is not the majority party in the region.

Newstartdate: 9/1/1974

The Uppsala Conflict Database report that the conflict first reached 25 battledeaths in September, 1974.

Newendate: 12/31/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the government-ETA conflict did not produce more than 25
battledeaths per year after 1992.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

268

Conflict: Tunisia vs. Résistance Armeé Tunisienne (conflict id 2490)

Conflict Summary: On January 27, 1980, a group of armed Tunisians crossed the border from Algeria and
seized the police and military headquarters in the town of Gafsa. The group, which called itself the Tunisian
Armed Resistance, announced that the attack was a beginning of a movement to overthrow the Tunisian
government. The Tunisian security forces fought back and by the evening of the 27

had retaken the

facilities, although the violence had produced many casualties. The Tunisian government accused Libyan
President Moamer Kadhafi of masterminding the attempted insurgency and of providing training to the
groups. This accusation was denied by the Libyan government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Tunisian Armed Resistance was a group that had previously not existed and did not compete in the
Tunisian political process.

Rebestimate: 175
Rebestlow: 50
Rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the Tunisian government said that the rebels numbered 50,
while other reports cited them as numbering as many as 300.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

269

Conflict: Gambia vs. SRLP (conflict id 2500)

Conflict Summary: On July 29, 1981, supporters of the left-wing Socialist and Revolutionary Labor Party
(SRLP), backed by some members of the military, attempted a coup d’etat against Gambian President Dawda
Jawara. The coup d’etat might have been successful as it received a good amount of support, however, on
July 31, Senegal honored the terms of a mutual defense agreement and sent 2,700 troops to support Jawara.
The coup plotters were quickly defeated and hundreds of people were killed in the fighting.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The radical left in Gambia had had a series of political parties, one of which was the Socialist and
Revolutionary Labor Party. The party was legal but had had very little success in Gambian elections.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the number of troops supporting the coup d’etat. However, it
is clear that those attempting the coup were no match for the government supporters once Senegal
intervened.

Mobcap: moderate

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the coup initially received popular support.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

270

Conflict: South Africa vs. Anti-Apartheid Organizations (conflict id 2510)

Conflict Summary: Although white South African represented less than 20% of the country’s population, they
dominated the political and economic sphere of South Africa from before independence in 1910 up through
the introduction of majority rule in 1994. In 1948, the South African government introduced a policy of
“apartheid,” which created separate (and unequal) housing and education for the country’s majority African
population and crystallized the political, economic, and social exclusion of black South Africans. In response,
a number of organizations formed to promote equality for blacks, including the African National Congress
(ANC), a leftist organization that had black, white, colored, and asian members, the Pan-African Congress
(PAC), a more militant African-nationalist organization that was made up exclusively of blacks, and the
Azanian People’s Organization (AZAPO), a small organization led by black intellectuals. In the late 1950s and
early 1960s, these three groups organized resistance to apartheid, but harsh state repression surpressed this
resistance and from 1961 to 1975, there was little protest of apartheid.

In the mid-1970s, however, violent opposition to artheid broke out which would continue for two

decades. In the 1960s, to avoid state repression, the ANC had created bases in independence African
countries such as Zambia and Tanzania and begun to organize support there. In the early 1970s, a growing
black-nationalist youth movement in South Africa generated more protest against the apartheid policies. In
1975, thousands of Africans protested the poor quality of schooling for blacks in Soweto, and the state
responded by massacring over 500 of the protesters. Unlike in the early 1960s, this harsh repression did not
have the effect of reducing protest against the state, but rather increased it, as the ANC and PAC organized
violent demonstrations and their military wings conducted urban guerilla-warfare type activities against
government installations.

The 1980s in South African were increasingly violent as many cities became virtual war-zones. The

power of the state was never directly threatened by the military operations of groups like the ANC and the
PAC, which were significantly weaker than the strength of the army. However, the effect of civil war on the
economy led many white South African businesspeople to push for negotiations with the ANC (the largest,
and also most moderate, of the anti-apartheid organizations). At the same time, international pressure on
South Africa to end the violent repression and to replace the oppressive apartheid policies increased.

In 1991, in response to these pressures, the new South African Prime Minister F.W. DeKlerk decided

to release African National Congress leader Nelson Mandela from his thirty-year imprisonment, to unban the
ANC and to begin negotiations with it and the other groups. Conflict and negotiations continued side-by-side
through 1993, when a comprehensive agreement was signed. The agreement called for the creation of a
transitional Government of National Unity for five years and then the implementation of full majority rule,
with protection for minority interests. In national elections in 1994, the ANC won a large majority and
Nelson Mandela became the country’s first post-apartheid President.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: South Africa vs. ANC

Rebpolwing: no

Blacks were not allowed to compete for political office in apartheid South Africa and prior to the 1993
signing of a comprehensive agreement, the ANC countered apartheid through organizing protest and through
violent terrorist and guerilla warfare tactics. It was only after the conflict ended that the ANC became a
political party.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 6,000
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

271

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the ANC: In 1987, 1987, 1988 and 1989: 10,000; in 1990, 1991 and 1992: 6,000-10,000; in 1993: no estimate.
These estimates are in comparison to the following estimates of the troop strength for the South African
army: In 1986 and 1987: 106,400; in 1988: 222,000; in 1989: 136,000; in 1990: 77,400; in 1991: 158,700; in
1992: 72,400; in 1993: 70,000.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The ANC had a very strong central leadership, even after Mandela and other key leaders were jailed.

Newendate: 11/18/1993

The South African negotiations were characterized by several agreements signed over years and so many
potential end dates could be used. November 18, 1993, was the day that the parties agreed to the new
constitution.

Dyad: South Africa vs. PAC

Rebpolwing: no

The PAC did not compete as a political organization until elections in 1994, after the conflict had ended.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 350
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1992 the PAC had 350 troops. No
estimates are given for any other point in the conflict. This estimate is in comparison to 72,400 troops
possessed by the South African government.

Dyad: South Africa vs. AZAPO

Rebpolwing: no

AZAPO opposed apartheid primarily through protest and was not a political organization.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by AZAPO.
However, the group was largely marginal in the conflict.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Thompson, Leonard (1995).

A History of South Africa

. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

•

Waldmeir, Patti (1997).

Anatomy of a Miracle: The End of Apartheid and the Birth of the New South Africa

New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

272

Conflict: India vs. Armed Groups in Manipur (conflict id 2530)

Conflict Summary: The region of Manipur in northeastern India was historically independent but became part
of India in 1949. Almost immediately after its incorporation into India, some groups began calling for the
secession of the region and the creation of an independent state of Manipur. Unlike many of the other
territorial conflicts in India, the insurgents in Manipur are generally not organized along ethnic or tribal lines,
but rather the armed struggles are led by leftist groups that cross ethnic divisions. Although several different
armed groups have waged war against the Indian government to try to bring about the independence of the
region, two major groups have been the leaders in the conflict. The United National Liberation Front
(UNLF) is a Marxist-organization that formed in the early 1960s to challenge the government, although it did
not enter into full-scale armed struggle with the Indian army until 1993. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA)
is a Maoist organization that formed in 1978 and in the early 1980s initiated armed conflict with the
government. Through the 1980s, the conflict persisted at a low-level of intensity, but by 1989 it appeared that
a large troop deployment in Manipur had given the Indian army the upper hand and that the PLA had been
defeated. In 1992, however, the PLA reinitiated the conflict and the UNLF joined the next year. In 1997, the
Kuki National Front, an organization made up of members of the Kuki Tribe, entered the conflict to press
the Indian government to grant greater autonomy to Kuki in the region. Despite some attempts by the Indian
government to resolve the conflict peacefully, the war is ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: India vs. UNLF

Rebpolwing: no

The UNLF is a Marxist organization pushing for secession that does not compete politically.

Rebestimate: 650
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 800
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 2000, the UNLF had between 500 and 800 troops. No
estimates are given for any other year of the conflict.

Newstartdate: 8/21/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Indian government and the UNLF
reached 25 battledeaths on August 21, 1994.

Dyad: India vs. PLA

Rebpolwing: no

The PLA is a Maoist organization pushing for secession that does not compete politically.

Rebestimate: 550
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 600
Rebstrength: much weaker

273

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 2000, the PLA had between 500 and 600 troops. No
estimates are given for any other year of the conflict.

Newstartdate: 7/13/1982

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the Indian government and the PLA
reached 25 battledeaths on July 13, 1982.

Dyad: India vs. KLF

Rebpolwing: no

The KLF is a militant organization that promotes greater autonomy for the Kuki Tribes and does not
compete politically.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1997, the KLF had fewer than 300 troops.

Newstartdate: 7/13/1997
Newenddate: 12/31/1997

The KLF had been involved in intercommunal violence that had produced many battledeaths prior to July 13,
1997. However, the Uppsala Conflict Database identifies that date that the conflict between the Indian
government and the KLF reached 25 battledeaths. The KLF has continued to fight after 1997, although on a
very low level.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

274

Conflict: Kenya vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2540)

Conflict Summary: On August 1, 1982, members of the Kenyan Air Force, backed by students from Nairobi
University, seized the Nairobi airport and the radio station and announced that they were going to overthrow
President Daniel Arap Moi. The grievance of the coup plotters was not explicitly stated, although there was
much dissatisfaction in the country with corruption in the government and with poor economic performance.
The coup plotters were unsuccessful and the military faction was quickly defeated by the army and the
security service, which stayed loyal to Moi.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The coup plotters were members of the Air Force, not an organized political opposition.

Rebestimate: 750
Rebestlow: 550
Rebesthigh: 1000

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that in the aftermath of the coup attempt 550 air force officers
were convicted of participating in the coup. Assuming that not all of the supporters were tried, the estimate is
placed at 750.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

275

Conflict: India vs. Sikh Insurgents (conflict id 2570)

Conflict Summary: The Sikh represent a minority religion in India, with both Hinduism (the religion practiced
by the majority of the Indian population) and Islam having a greater number of adherents. Through India’s
nearly 60 year independent history, Sikh groups have called for the creation of an independent state of
Khalistan, which would be majority Sikh. In the late 1970s there was much intercommunal violence in the
state of Punjab (where the majority of Indian Sikhs reside) and the Indian government intervened militarily to
stop the violence. This intervention heightened tensions between the government and the Sikhs and in 1980s,
several Sikh militant organizations launched an armed struggle against the Indian government to push for
greater autonomy, leading up to secession. The Indian government at first pursued a policy of negotiating
with the rebels, but was unable to suppress the rebellion. In elections in Punjab in 1989, Sikh militants gained
a majority of the seats and by 1990 they had achieved major success against the government. This success
forced the Indian government to deploy a massive military force and by 1993 had defeated the rebellion.

Notes on Coding

rebpolwing: explicit link
rebpolwinglegal: yes

Members of Sikh militant groups won elections in the state of Punjab in 1989.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 9,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1987 and 1988, the Sikh insurgents
had about 9,000 troops. This is in comparison to over a million for the Indian army, although until 1990 the
Indian government had not deployed very many troops to Punjab.

Centcont: No

The Sikh insurgents really comprise a large number of groups (more than 20) rather than one coherent
opposition group.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

276

Conflict: Sri Lanka vs. Tamil Insurgents (conflict id 2580)

Conflict Summary: The twenty-year conflict between insurgent groups representing the Sri Lankan Tamil
population and the Sinhalese government has been very deadly, producing over 65,000 casualties and
attracting high levels of international attention. The conflict began in the mid-1980s, but its roots lay in the
policies pursued by the Sri Lankan government since its independence from Britain in 1948. Sri Lanka has a
majority Sinhalese population, which is Buddhist and speaks Sinhalese. However, it has a sizable Sri Lankan
Tamil minority, which is Hindu and speaks Tamil. Following independence, the Sinhalese majority controlled
the government and attempted to build a strong, centralized state with Sinhalese as the official language and
Buddhism as the official religion. These policies were unable to stem the grown of Tamil nationalism,
however, and by the late 1970s, the Tamil-majority areas of northern Sri Lanka saw massive protests for
greater autonomy for the Tamils. In 1983, several insurgent groups began an armed campaign for secession of
the Tamil-regions of northern Sri Lanka (which they referred to as Tamil Eelam), the most prominent of
which were the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), the Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization (TELO)
and the People’s Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam (PLOTE). These groups carried out a mixture of
insurgent and terrorist tactics to challenge the Sri Lankan government’s control of Tamil territories. The
LTTE proved the most successful, and by the late 1980s the other organizations had largely dissolved and
LTTE had established supremacy as the main armed representative of the Tamil cause.

In 1987, the Indian government deployed a major “peacekeeping mission” of 75,000-90,000 troops

to the island to try to terminate the conflict. However, the LTTE did not agree with the Indian mandate, and
fighting continued between the Indian force and the rebel organization. In 1989, after some progress in
negotiations with the LTTE, the Sri Lankan government agreed to dismiss the Indian mission, but within
months after their departure, full-scale warfare resumed. The conflict continued throughout the 1990s and
into the 21

century despite several attempts at international mediation, and despite the signing of a cease-fire

in February 2002, the conflict was ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Sri Lanka vs. LTTE

Rebpolwing: no

The LTTE has fought for the independence of Tamil Eelam militarily and has not competed as a political
organization.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the LTTE: In 1988 and 1989: 2,000; in 1990: 2,000-3,000, in 1991: 8,000; in 1992 and 1993: 7,000; in 1994,
1995 and 1996: 6,000-10,000; in 1997: 5,000-8,000; in 1998: 6,000-8,000; in 1999, 2000 and 2001: 6,000-7,000;
in 2002: 6,000. These estimates are in comparison to over 100,000 for the Sri Lankan government.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Jaffna Peninsula
Effterrcont: High

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in an offensive in 1990, the LTTE gained control over the Jaffna
Peninsula. They created a civilian political wing to administer government in the province and were able to
rule it until 1995.

277

Newstartdate: 7/1/1983

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between Sri Lanka and the LTTE first reached 25
battledeaths on July 1, 1983.

Dyad: Sri Lanka vs. TELO

Rebpolwing : no

TELO was a military organization and did not compete in the domestic Sri Lankan political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by TELO. However,
it is clear that the organization was considerably weaker than the Sri Lankan army.

Newstartdate: 7/1/1983

No information was available on when the TELO-Sri Lankan government dyad reached 25 battledeaths. So,
the same date is used as for the Sri Lanka-LTTE dyad.

Newendate: 12/31/1988

It is not clear exactly when TELO dropped out of the conflict. However, it is clear that the organization was
no longer relevant by the end of 1988.

Dyad: Sri Lanka vs. PLOTE

Rebpolwing: no

PLOTE was a military organization and did not compete in the domestic Sri Lankan political process.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gave any indication as to the number of troops possessed by PLOTE.
However, it is clear that the organization was considerably weaker than the Sri Lankan army.

Newstartdate: 7/1/1983

No information was available on when the Sri Lankan government-PLOTE dyad reached 25 battledeaths. So,
the same date is used as for the Sri Lanka-LTTE dyad.

Newendate: 12/31/1988

It is not clear exactly when TELO dropped out of the conflict. However, it is clear that the organization was
no longer relevant by the end of 1988.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

279

Conflict: Cameroon vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2590)

Conflict Summary: On April 6, 1984 a faction of about 500 members of the Republican Guard seized the
radio station and attempted to overthrow President Paul Biya. The Republican Guard was a unit of about
1,000 troops that were outside of the regular army and who served to protect the President and defend the
Presidential palace. The leadership of the faction was upset over Biya’s decision to transfer some members of
the Guard to other units. There was fighting in Yaoundé, the capital, for four days before the rebels were
completely defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The members of the Republic Guard attempted a coup out of dissatisfaction with Biya’s policy toward the
unit, rather than as a rival political group.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that about half of the 1,000 unit Republican Guard joined the
rebellion.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

280

Conflict: Turkey vs. PKK (conflict id 2600)

Conflict Summary: Kurds represent a significant minority (around 20%) of the Turkish population, and have
traditionally faced much discrimination. The use of Kurdish language is outlawed and Kurds are encouraged
to reject their culture to gain greater access to Turkish society and economy. In the late 1970s, several
different Kurdish militant organizations formed to push for rights and greater autonomy for the Kurds. The
most important of these groups was the Kurdish Worker’s Party (PKK), an organization which started an
armed struggle against the Turkish government in 1984 and called for the creation of an independent state of
Kurdistan. The PKK used based in northern Iraq (which also has a large Kurdish population) to launch
attacks against government positions in the Kurdish areas of Turkey. The civil war produced a large number
of casualties, but throughout the 1980s the Turkish army was able to gain the upper hand. In 1991, however,
with the defeat of Saddam Hussein in the Persian Gulf War, the PKK (and other Kurdish groups) gained
greater access to Iraq and were able to use Iraqi territory to better defend themselves from Turkish attacks.
The Turkish army intervened in Northern Iraq, however, and was able to inflict serious casualties on the
PKK, and by the end of the 1990s, the group had been severely military weakened. At that time, in fact, the
group decided to change its strategy, dropped its call for an independent Kurdistan and called only for greater
autonomy within Turkey. In 1999, the leader of the PKK was captured. As of the end of 2003, the armed
conflict between Turkey and the PKK continues, however, at a lower level of intensity, as Turkish victories
and a shift of strategy have led to decreased conflict.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

Minorities at Risk reports that the People’s Democracy Party (HADEP) is alleged to have connections to the
PKK, although the group denies them. HADEP is a legal political party, but has faced restrictions because
parties with a Kurdish-platform are outlawed.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 12,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of the PKK: In 1989:
300-1000; in 1990: 1500-3500; in 1991: 3400; in 1992: 8,000-10,000; in 1993: 7,000-10,000; in 1994, 1995, and
1996: 10,000-12,000; in 1997: 6,000-10,000; in 1998: 5,000-6,000; in 1999: 5,000; in 2000: 4,000-5,000; in 2001
and 2002: 3,000-5,000; in 2003: more than 5,000. This is in comparison to hundreds of thousands of troops
possessed by the Turkish army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: moderate

Until his arrest in 1999, the PKK had one major leader across the course of the conflict: Abdullah Öcalan.
The group has experienced some fractionalization as a result of disagreement over strategies, but generally has
stayed as one coherent group under Ocalan’s leadership.

Newstartdate: 12/31/1984

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that at least 25 battledeaths occurred in 1984, but that it is impossible
to determine when exactly that number was reached, so the start is dated at the end of that year.

282

Conflict: Surinam vs. SLA/Jungle Commandos (conflict id 2630)

Conflict Summary: In 1986, a rebellion broke out against the military government of Surinam. The rebellion
was led by Ronny Brunswijk, a former Sergeant in the army and a member of the maroon ethnic group,
which is made up of runaway slaves and is the ethnic group that faces the most ethnic and social
discrimination in Surinam. Brunswijk’s “Jungle Commandos” were a small group that was not able to
mobilize much popular support, but it was able to attract some foreign mercenaries to help it wages its fight.
Additionally, the government in Surinam was so weak due to years of corruption and economic
mismanagement that it was unable to completely defeat the rebellion. The government did have some military
success against the rebels in the early years of the conflict so that, after 1988, although the Jungle
Commandos still existed the conflict continued at a very low level of intensity.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The Jungle Commandos were a military, not a political, organization dedicated to the overthrow of the
Surinam government.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the military strength of the Jungle Commandos. However, it is
clear that they were weaker than the Surinam military and were primarily able to operate in the periphery of
the country.

Sources:

•

Toronto Star (obtained through Lexis Nexis)

•

The Independent (obtained through Lexis Nexis)

283

Conflict: Togo vs. MTD (conflict id 2640, dyad 2150)

Conflict Summary: On September 23, a group of about 60 well-armed supporters of the exiled opposition
party Movement for Togolese Democracy (MTD) attempted to take control of the military headquarters and
overthrow Togoloese President Eyadema. The state security services stopped the attempted coup and many
of the 60 were arrested. Gunfire continued for a few days after the 23

, and on September 25

France

deployed troops to support the Togolese leader. On September 28, Zaire also sent troops as a show of
solidarity.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: alleged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The government accused those who attempted the coup of being supporters of the Movement for Togolese
Democracy (MTD) an opposition party that had been exiled.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 60

Keesing’s Record of World Events estimates that the rebels numbered about 60.

Armsproc: moderate

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the 60 rebels were “well-armed.”

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

284

Conflict: Togo vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2640, dyad 2160)

Conflict Summary: In early 1991, Togo experienced large scale strikes and protests calling for the
introduction of multiparty democracy. In response, the military President, General Gnassingbé Eyadéma
agreed to convene a national conference that would establish a transitional government. The new government
created by the conference removed almost all power from the President and vested executive power in the
hands of the Prime Minister, a main opposition figure. The new government began on September 7, 1991 and
by October 1 members of the armed forces loyal to Eyadéma launched an armed struggle to restore his
powers. Over the next couple of months the forces made several unsuccessful attempts to seize the
government, but on December 3, 1991, they captured the Prime Minister. He was released the next day at
which point he called for the formation of a Government of National Unity between his and the President’s
parties. The new government was formed by the end of the year.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

Although Eyadéma publicly condemned the violence, the faction of the military was fighting directly on his
behalf and that of his party. The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the president’s party was made illegal
on November 26, however, it was legal for most of the conflict.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

None of the sources provided any estimate of the troop strength of the military faction or the part of the
army that remained loyal to the new government. However, it is clear that their forces were relatively evenly
matched.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

285

Conflict: South Yemen vs. Faction of Yemenite Socialist Party (conflict id 2650)

Conflict Summary: In late 1985, major divisions had emerged in the ruling Yemenite Socialist Party, primarily
between the President and some members of the Yemenite Socialist Party Political Bureau. On January 13,
1986, South Yemen’s President Mohammed initiated a preemptive strike by ordering the assassination of four
members of the Political Bureau. The assassination attempts were not entirely successful as three members
escaped and immediately called for armed support. Civil war erupted between forces loyal to each of the two
factions. At the outbreak, it looked like the President’s forces had the upper hand, since the navy and air force
stayed mostly on his side. However, much of the army threw its support behind the opponents of the
president and, after ten days of heavy fighting in the capital, the President fled and the rebels were victorious.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The armed opposition to the government was led by members of the Yemenite Socialist Party Political
Bureau, the ruling body in South Yemen.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebestlow: unclear
Rebesthigh: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources provided any estimate of the troop strength of the supporters of either side. However,
the rebel forces were able to gain the upper hand pretty quickly.

Source:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

286

Conflict: Burkina Faso vs. Popular Front (conflict id 2660)

Conflict Summary: On October 15, 1987, the military leader of Burkina Faso, Captain Thomas Sankara and
several of his close advisers were killed in a military coup. The coup was led by another Captain, Blaise
Compaore, who was the main adviser to Sankara. Sankara had been a charismatic leader but had been unable
to address the rampant poverty experienced by Burkina Faso. The Presidential Guard of Sankara put up
resistance when Compaore’s forces attacked, and nearly 100 people died in the fighting.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

Captain Compaore, the leader of the Popular Front, was the main adviser to Sankara.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: unclear

None of the sources made any reference to the number of troops loyal to either Sankara or Compaore.

Sources:

•

The Toronto Star (accessed via Lexis Nexis)

•

The New York Times (accessed via Lexis Nexis)

287

Conflict: Comoros vs. Presidential Guard (conflict id 2680)

Conflict Summary: Comoros achieved independence from France in 1975 and in 1978, Ahmed Abdallah,
backed by a mercenary force led by Bob Denard, seized power in a coup d’etat. Denard’s force became the
Presidential Guard, the major security force supporting Abdallah, and Denard had a major economic and
political position in the country. France and South Africa continued to support Abdallah’s government until
1989 when they pressured him to expel Denard from the country. Abdallah responded to this pressure and,
on the night of November 26, 1989, Abdallah was assassinated. Denard was widely believed to have been
responsible and in the days following the assassination, he threw out the provisional president and installed a
new president. South Africa and France increased pressure on the government of Comoros to remove
Denard and on December 15, 1989, Denard left Comoros peacefully.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Denard and the Presidential Guard had been the security forces for the President and assassinated him when
they believed he had agreed to exile them from the country.

Rebestimate: 500
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 700
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the Presidential Guard had between 300 and 700 troops. This
is in comparison to around 1000 troops possessed by the army.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

288

Conflict: Ethiopia vs. Afar groups (conflict id 2690)

Conflict Summary: The Afar reside along what is now the border between Ethiopia and Eritrea. In 1975, the
Afar Liberation Front (ALF) declared an armed struggle to protect Afar interests. In 1989, the group joined
with other ethnic-based rebel groups such as the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front (see conflict id 1780) and
the Tigrayan People’s Liberation Front (see conflict id 1700) in an attempt to overthrow the Marxist leader
Mengistu. In 1991, the joint operations of those groups, led by the TPLF, were successful, and Mengistu was
overthrown. After that, the ALF ceased its armed struggle and joined a coalition government led by the
TPLF. However, some members of the Afar continued to feel discriminated in Ethiopia and in 1995, the
Afar Revolutionary Democratic Unity Front (AFDUF) began pushing for self-determination for the Afar
violently. The government responded with violence and in 1996 the conflict reached a higher level of
intensity. By the end of 1996 the intensity of the conflict had dropped and negotiations with the government
produced a cease-fire in 1997 that most of the factions of the ARDUF appeared to adhere to.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. ALF

Rebpolwing: no

The Afar Liberation Front was an armed group that did not compete politically in Ethiopia until it
participated in the overthrow of Ethiopian President Mengistu, when it became a political party.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gives any indication of the troop strength of the ALF. However, it is clear that they were
the weakest party in the TPLF/EPLF/OLF/ALF coalition that overthrew Mengistu in 1991.

Mobcap: low

Minorities at Risk reports that the Afar only constitute 4% of the total Ethiopian population.

Dyad: Ethiopia vs. ARDUF

Rebpolwing: unclear

None of the sources gave any indication whether the ARDUF was just an armed group or also had a political
wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication of the number of troops possessed by the ARDUF. However, it is
clear that the ARDUF was weaker than the total might of the Ethiopian military.

Mobcap: low

Minorities at Risk reports that the Afar only constitute 4% of the total Ethiopian population.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

290

Conflict: India vs. Kashmir Insurgents (conflict id 2700)

Conflict Summary: Kashmir is a region that has been very conflictual, both within India and as a subject of
contention between India and Pakistan. Upon India’s independence and partition into India and Pakistan in
1947, Kashmir was made part of India on a temporary basis. In 1948, India and Pakistan went to war over the
region and the cease-fire that ended that war produced a de-facto border that has since divided the region
between India and Pakistan. Throughout India’s almost-sixty year independent history there has been a
significant movement in Kashmir demanding secession from India (this movement is split over whether this
secession should lead to an independent state of Kashmir or to the province being joined with Pakistan). In
the late 1980s, this opposition became violent as the Jammu and Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) began
attacking Indian government targets. For the next fourteen years, the conflict has continued at varying levels
of intensity resulting in a high-state of instability in the region and producing thousands of casualties. The
conflict is ongoing as of the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The JKLF and other militants have pursued the conflict violently and are not political organizations.

Rebestimate: 5000
Rebestlow: 3000
Rebesthigh: 5000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the number of troops
possessed by the Kashmir militants: In 1991: 3000-5000, in 1992-1999: no estimate; in 2000, 2001, and 2002:
5,000. This is in comparison to the over 1 million troops possessed by the entire Indian army and the over
500,000 Indian troops deployed in Kashmir.

Centcont: No

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the Kashmiri opposition movement was extremely fractionalized,
with over 40 different organizations participating in the struggle.

Armsproc: moderate

The Kashmiri militants are supplied with arms by Pakistan.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

291

Conflict: India vs. Assamese and Bodos (conflict id 2710)

Conflict Summary: India is a large multi-national state that faces challenges from several ethnic groups
demanding increased autonomy, leading up to secession. In the northeast region of Assam, the Indian
government faces these challenges from two main groups: the Assamese and the Bodos. The two conflicts
are distinct, the Assamese and Bodos are seeking different objectives, but they are linked. Additionally, in
both cases one of the major grievances driving conflicts has been the issue of migration of Bengali-speaking
peoples into Assamese and Bodo areas.

The Bodos were historically a majority in northern Assam but over the last twenty years have lost

that status due to high rates of migration into Bodo territories. In the 1980s, two political organizations, the
All Bodo Student Union (ABSU) and the Bodo People’s Action Committee (BPAC), were formed to press
the state to accede to a range of demands, including a Bodo state where Bodo would be the national language
and greater access for the Bodo population to government jobs and higher education. In the early 1980s,
these groups carried out some attacks to pressure the government to accede to their demands but, since the
end of 1990, they have largely pursued a nonviolent approach. In the 1990s, however, two other Bodo groups
have emerged, the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB—formerly the Bodoland Security Force
(BDSF)) and the Bodoland Liberation Tiger Force (BLTF). Each group has different demands, the BLTF is
seeking greater autonomy within India while the NDFB is demanding secession, and both have utilized more
violence than the ABSU and BPAC.

The Assamese are the dominant group in the state of Assam. However, they also feel threatened by

the in-migration of Bengalis into northern India. In the 1970s, the United Liberation Front of Assam (ULFA)
formed to push for the banning of migration into Assam and eventually for the formation of an independent
state of Assam. The conflict stayed at a low level of intensity until 1990, when the ULFA began to push its
demands more violently, and the Indian government dissolved the provincial authority in Assam and assumed
direct control over the province. In 1990 and 1991 the conflict continued at a moderate level of intensity, but
the ULFA was not able to accomplish much militarily. In December 1991 negotiations between the
government and some members of the ULFA over the terms of their surrender lead to a general amnesty in
which thousands of ULFA fighters voluntarily disarmed. A faction of the organization rejected the
negotiations, however, and continued the armed struggle, which continues at a low level of intensity through
the end of 2003.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: India vs. ABSU

Note: Over the course of the conflict, the ABSU and BPAC have become so closely allied that it probably
does not make sense to treat them as two separate groups.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The ABSU formed as a political organization and has continued to push for greater autonomy politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources gave any indication as to the troop strength of the ABSU. However, it is clear that the
organization is much overpowered by the Indian army.

Newstartdate: 3/16/1989

292

The ABSU began their insurgency in February of 1989 and the Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by
March 16, 1989, it had been confirmed that at least 35 security personnel had been killed in the insurgency.

Newendate: 12/31/1990

ABSU in late 1990 decided to shift from a strategy of violence to one of negotiations and so their armed
struggle ended that year. It is not clear an exact date when this decision was made.

Dyad: India vs. BPAC

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The BPAC started in the 1980s as a political organization and has continued to push for greater autonomy
politically.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources available gave any indication as to the troop strength of the BPAC. However, it is clear
that the organization was no match for the Indian army.

Dyad: India vs. BLTF

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

In addition to their armed struggle, the BLTF have participated in local Bodo politics as a political
organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources gives any indication as to the number of troops possessed by the BLFT.
However, it is clear that the group is considerably weaker than the Indian army.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1995

It is not easy to determine exactly when the BLTF insurgency began. However, the Uppsala Conflict
Database reports that the group was active militarily by 1995, so I have dated the conflict as beginning on the
first day of that year.

Dyad: India vs. BDSF/NDFB

Rebpolwing: no

The National Democratic Front of Bodoland is an organization that has pushed for secession militarily and
does not have a political wing.

Rebestimate: 1,500
Rebestlow: 600
Rebesthigh: 3,500

293

Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the best estimate for the troop strength of the NDFB is 1,500. It
gives the following estimates over the course of the conflict: In 1998 and 1999: 1,500-3,500; in 2000: 600-
3,500; in 2001 and 2002: 1,500-3,500. This is in comparison to more than 1 million troops possessed by the
Indian army.

Dyad: India vs. ULFA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The ULFA served as both an armed insurgent group and a political movement. Keesing’s Record of World
Events reported in January 1991 that the Indian government had decided to ban the organization because of
its use of violence.

Rebestimate: 4,000
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of the ULFA: In 1990:
500-3000; in 1991: 4000. This is in comparison to over 1 million troops for the Indian army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The ULFA was a factionalized organization that split over the issue of negotiations with the government.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

In December 1991, the Indian government offered an amnesty to ULFA members and thousands of them
surrendered. This led to a splinter in the organization and a faction of the ULFA, often called the “real
ULFA” continued the armed struggle.

Dyad: ULFA faction

Rebpolwing: no

The faction of the ULFA that continued the armed struggle after 1991 rejected negotiations.

Rebestimate: 2,250
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the number of troops possessed by the
ULFA faction: In 1992: no information; in 1994 and 1995: 500-3,000; in 1996 and 1997: 700-3,000; in 1998:
700; in 1999: 500-3,000; in 2000: 1,000-3,000; in 2001: 3,000; in 2002: 3,000-4,000.

Newstartdate: 1/1/1993

295

Conflict: Indonesia vs. GAM (conflict id 2720)

Conflict Summary

This conflict is best described in two periods.

Period 1 (1990-1991)
Aceh is a region of Indonesia which had three attributes making it prime for conflict: the Acehnese are
culturally and religiously different from the dominant Indonesian population, Aceh is a rich province, and it
has a history of independence (it was an independent sultanate for 500 years prior to the 19

century).

Beginning in the 1950s, the province has a long history of opposition to the Indonesian government and the
Acehnese have pushed for greater autonomy from the central government for a long time. In 1976, the Free
Aceh Movement (GAM) declared an independent Aceh, and that proclamation was met with a violent
response by the central government. The organization operated at a very low-level throughout the 1980s, but
the continued influx of migrants into Aceh increased the grievance of the population. In 1989, local Acehnese
army recruits joined GAM and it launched a new armed struggle against the government. The organization
was overmatched by the government, however, and was rather quickly defeated.

Period 2
In the late 1990s, Indonesia was in economic crisis and the grievances among the Acehnese population had
only increased. In 1997, GAM again launched an armed struggle against the government and in 1999 and
2000 there were massive protests calling for independence. Negotiations produced brief respites from
fighting in 2001, 2002, and 2003, however, none of the agreements were fully implemented and the conflict
was ongoing as of the end of 2003. As the conflict has continued the GAM has become progressively
stronger and has gained in its position contra the Indonesian government.

Notes on Coding

Period 1

Rebpolwing: no

The GAM is an independence movement and does not participate in the domestic Indonesian political
process.

Rebestimate: 1,100
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 2,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1990 the GAM had between 200 and 2000 troops at its
disposal. This is in comparison to 12,000 troops for the Indonesian army.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Aceh
Effterrcont: low

The GAM was able to exert a degree of control in Aceh, however, it could not in this period do very much
that a normal governing body can.

Period 2

296

Rebpolwing: no

The GAM is an independence movement and does not participate in the domestic Indonesian political
process.

Rebestimate: 14,000
Rebestlow: 800
Rebesthigh: 27,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database gives the following estimates for the troop strength of GAM in this period: In
1999: 800; in 2000: no information; in 2001: 2,000-27,000; in 2002 and 2003: no information. This is in
comparison to the following estimates for the Indonesian army forces deployed in Aceh: In 1999 and 2000:
no information; in 2001: 30,000; in 2002: no information; in 2003: 50,000.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Aceh
Effterrcont: moderate

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that by this period of the conflict GAM had been able to set up
“alternative local administrations in parts of Aceh.”

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

297

Conflict: Panama vs. Military Faction (conflict id 2740)

Conflict Summary: On October 3, 1989, a group of military officers seized Panamian President Manuel
Noriega and the military headquarters. They listed their major grievances as corruption in the army and were
protesting Noriega’s management of the military. The United States had also indicated its support for armed
opposition to Noriega, although the military officers did not indicate that they would hand the leader over to
the United States to face drug charges. Shortly after the attempted coup d’etat, military forces loyal to Noriega
surrounded the military headquarters and the military faction was defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The military officers who attempted the coup were opposed to Noriega’s management of the military and did
not have a political wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

It is not clear how many officers participated in the attempted coup. However, it is clear that the portion of
the army that remained loyal to Noriega was stronger.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The attempted coup was led by Major Moisés Giroldi Vega.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

298

Conflict: Papua New Guinea vs. Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA) (conflict id 2760)

Conflict Summary: The island of Bougainville has a population that is ethnically different from the bulk of
the population of Papua New Guinea. Additionally, Bougainville has much mineral wealth in the form of a
copper mine which, from prior to independence in 1975, was mined by a British-Australian mining company.
One of the major factors motivating the grievance of the Bougainville population was that they received very
little benefit from the large copper exports from the island. In late 1988, the Bougainville Revolutionary Army
(BRA) was formed, calling for independence for the island and a greater percentage of the profits from the
copper mine. The BRA targeted violence against the mining company and in December, 1988 the mine
closed. The initial success of the BRA prompted the Papua New Guinean military to blockade the island,
which created major hardships for the population. Negotiations from 1994 to 1997 produced little effect, but
in October 1997 a truce was signed which led to a major decrease in the level of violence observed. A series
of cease-fires and partial peace accords over the next four years led up to the 2001 Bougainville Peace
Agreement which gave greater autonomy to the island and laid the groundwork for a vote on independence
in 10-15 years.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The BRA was an armed movement that fought for independence for the island and so did not participate in
domestic political affairs.

Rebestimate: 2000
Rebestlow: 30
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates the troop strength of the BRA as follows: In 1989: 30-200; in 1990:
no information; in 1991: 20,000; in 1992: 100-1000; in 1993, 1994, and 1995: 2000, in 1996: 3000; in 1997:
200-1000; in 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001: no information. This is in comparison to the following estimates for
the troops deployed by Papua New Guinea to the conflict: In 1989: 800-3200; in 1990: 500-3200; in 1991:
300-1100; in 1992: 500-4000; in 1993: 3800; in 1994: 3200; in 1995: 3800; in 1996: 1400-3500; in 1997: 3800-
4700; in 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001: no information.

Mobcap: moderate

The BRA was able to mobilize a good segment of the population of Bougainville to its cause. However, there
were also pro-government militias that fought against the BRA on the island.

Armsproc: low

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the BRA used primarily weapons that were leftover on the island
from the Second World War.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

299

Conflict: Romania vs. National Salvation Front (conflict id 2770)

Conflict Summary: In December 1989, Romania was wracked by huge demonstrations against the
government. The country had been led by Nicolae Ceausescu since 1974, a nationalist leader who had been
popular until the country went through a dire recession in the 1980s. The demonstrations began in Timisoara,
Romania, on December 17, 1989, and within days had spread to a much wider area of the country. The state
security services responded by attacking the demonstrators, but on December 22 the Romania army defected
from supporting the government and began backing the demonstrators. Ceausescu and his wife tried to flee
the country but were stopped by the militarily and were hastily tried on December 25 and executed. In the
aftermath of the overthrow of the government a new governing body, the National Salvation Front, was
hastily thrown together by the organizers of the demonstrations.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the organizers of the demonstration formed a government once Ceasescu was overthrow, while the
conflict took place it was not clear who the organizers were and they did not compete in the domestic
political system.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much sronger

None of the sources gave any indication of the number of people participating in the insurrection. However,
once the military defected the National Salvation Front was much stronger than the government.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

300

Conflict: Mali vs. Tuareg organizations (conflict id 2790)

Conflict Summary: In the early 1990s, the return of many Malian Tuaregs who had left the country during
droughts in the 1970s and 1980s combined with the government’s failure to deliver promised resettlement aid
led to the creation of several Tuareg organizations opposed to the government of Mali. Although a consistent
level of low-intensity conflict was present throughout much of the 1990s, most of these Tuareg organizations
were small and were not able to accomplish much militarily. Two organizations, however, were able to
become strong enough to push the conflict into the category of a minor armed conflict. In June 1990, the
Azaward People’s Movement (MPA), an organization dedicated to pressuring Tuareg interests in Mali, had its
first armed clashes with the government and fighting over the next seven months produced several casualties.
On January 6, 1991, the MPA signed a peace agreement with the government in Algeria, which led to an
immediate split in the organization. Low-intensity conflict continued between various Algerian groups and
the Malian government through September, 1994 when the Islamic Arab Front of Azawad (FIAA) declared
war against the government. The fighting continued until January 7, 1995, when the FIAA declared a total
ceasefire.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Niger vs. MPA

Rebpolwing: no

None of the sources made any reference to the MPA having a political wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication of the troop strength of the MPA. However, it is clear that the group
was substantially weaker than the Malian government.

Centcont: no

The MPA was beset by fractionalization, as best demonstrated by the group splintering when it signed a peace
agreement with the Malian government.

Mobcap: low

Minorities at Risk reports that the Tuareg represent only 6% of the population of Mali.

Dyad: Niger vs. FIAA

Rebpolwing: no

None of the sources made any reference to the FIAA having a political wing.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources gave any indication of the troop strength of the FIAA. However, it is clear that the
group was substantially weaker than the Malian government.

Cencont: unclear

302

Conflict: Niger vs. Tuareg organizations (conflict id 2800)

Conflict Summary: Throughout the 1990s, the government of Niger has faced armed resistance from several
different guerilla groups fighting on behalf of Tuareg interests. The Tuareg are a primarily nomadic ethnic
group who make up about 8% of the population of Niger and live primarily in the northern parts of the
country near the Sahara. In the 1980s, severe drought compounded the government of Niger’s failure to
follow through on promises of development and humanitarian assistance to heighten Tuareg grievances. In
May, 1990, armed rebellion broke out when armed Tuaregs attacked a prison in northeastern Niger, an action
which was followed by severe reprisals by the government. In September 1991, the Air and Azawad
Liberation Front (FLAA) formed as a guerilla organization to challenge government mistreatment of the
Tuareg population and to push for greater autonomy and development. In 1992, the conflict reached a higher
level of intensity and negotiations between the government and the FLAA produced a peace agreement at
Paris, France on June 10, 1993. The signing of the agreement immediately let to a split within the FLAA, with
the “old FLAA” being opposed to the agreement and a new organization, the Front for the Liberation of
Tamoust supporting it. In September 1993, a new umbrella organization, the Coordination of the Armed
Resistance (CRA) was formed to coordinate the various groups, and it engaged in armed struggle with the
government of Niger for the next 13 months until on October 9, 1994, a peace agreement was signed
between the CRA and the government at Ougadougou, Burkina Faso. In November 1996 a number of small
Tuareg organizations united to form a new political movement, the Union of Forces of the Armed Resistance
(UFRA). The UFRA at its formation expressed its commitment to the existing peace accords but by March
1997 began an armed struggle out of frustration with the slow pace of the peace agreement. In November,
the government and UFRA signed a peace accord which ended the conflict.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Niger vs. FLAA

Rebpolwing: no

None of the sources available made any reference to a political wing of the FLAA.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources available made any reference to the number of troops possessed by the FLAA. However
it is clear from the conduct of the fighting that the group was weaker than the army of Niger.

Centcont: no

The FLAA was beset by fractionalization since its formation, as demonstrated by the fact that the group
immediately broke into two when the leader of the FLAA signed a peace agreement with the government.

Mobcap: low

According to Minorities at Risk, the Tuareg represent only 8% of Niger’s population.

Newstartdate: 10/31/1992

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that October 31, 1992, is the date when the conflict reached 25
battledeaths. The armed struggle began much early, sometime in October 1991.

Dyad: Niger vs. CRA

303

Rebpolwing: no

None of the sources available made any reference to a political wing of the CRA.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources available made any reference to the number of troops possessed by the CRA. However
it is clear from the conduct of the fighting that the group was weaker than the army of Niger.

Centcont: unclear

None of the sources available gave any indication about whether the CRA had a central command structure
or how strong the control of the center was.

Mobcap: low

According to Minorities at Risk, the Tuareg represent only 8% of Niger’s population.

Newstartdate: 5/16/1994

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict reached 25 battlefield deaths on May 16, 1994.

Dyad: Niger vs. UFRA

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The Uppsala Conflict Database refers to the UFRA as a “political party.” No reference was found to whether
this group was legal in Niger.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources available made any reference to the number of troops possessed by the UFRA. However
it is clear from the conduct of the fighting that the group was weaker than the army of Niger.

Centcont: unclear

None of the sources available gave any indication about whether the UFRA had a central command structure
or how strong the control of the center was.

Mobcap: low

According to Minorities at Risk, the Tuareg represent only 8% of Niger’s population.

Newstartdate: 10/19/1997

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the conflict between the UFRA and the government reached 25
battledeaths sometime between October 19, 1997 and November 29, 1997.

305

Conflict: Rwanda vs. FPR (conflict id 2810, dyad 2350)

Conflict Summary: Rwanda has two main ethnic groups, the Hutu (who represent approximately 85% of the
population) and the Tutsi (who represent about 14% of the population). There is a long history of conflict
between the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda dating back to the colonial period. Historically, the Tutsi had political
control of the country and this continued throughout most of the Belgian colonial rule. From 1959-1964,
however, there was a “Hutu Revolution” in the country, in which Hutu took power and tens of thousands of
Tutsi left Rwanda as refugees. Many of these refugees went to Uganda where they stayed for thirty years,
becoming embroiled in internal conflicts there (see conflict id 2180). In the late 1980s, the Rwandan Tutsi
refugees in Uganda began organizing into a coherent fighting force, the Rwandan Patriotic Front (FPR) and
in 1990, the FPR launched attacks into northwestern Rwanda aimed at overthrowing the Hutu-dominated
government there. Over the next three years the war between the FPR and the Hutu government was bloody,
but the FPR proved to be stronger militarily and was prevented from capturing Kigali primarily by
international pressure to negotiate. A peace accord signed at Arusha, Tanzania, in 1993 produced a peace
agreement in which the parties agreed to share power in the government and military. There was partial
implementation of the peace accords, however, Hutu militants within and outside the government used the
period after Arusha to finalize plans for genocide against the Rwandan Tutsi population. On April 4, 1994, a
plane carrying the President of Rwanda, Juvenal Habyarimana was shot down and the genocide began,
resulting in the death of between 500,000 and 1 million Tutsi and moderate Hutu. The genocide continued
for the next three months until the RPF, who had restarted the war shortly after the genocide broke out, took
Kigali and 2 million Hutu fled the country, many into neighboring Zaire (see conflict id 2810, dyad 2360).

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

After the Arusha Accords, the FPR was a participant in the Rwandan government. However, prior to Arusha
the FPR existed solely as a military force and did not participate in the domestic Rwandan political process.

Rebestimate: 15,000
Rebestlow: 3,000
Rebesthigh: 20,000
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute gives the following estimates for the troop strength of
the FPR. In 1990 and 1991, no estimate; in 1992, 3,000-5,000; in 1993, 10,000-15,000; in 1994, 15,000-20000.
This estimate is in comparison to the following estimates for the Rwandan army: in 1991, 5,200; in 1992 and
1993, 40,000; in 1994, 30,000. Despite the fact that the Rwandan army had more troops than the FPR, the
FPR represented a more formidable fighting force because it was better organized, trained, and more combat-
experienced.

Mobcap: low

The FPR represented the Rwandan Tutsi, who were a significant minority of the overall population.

Newendate: 7/19/1994

On July 19, 1994, the FPR took Kigali and established a new government there.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

307

Conflict: Rwanda vs. Opposition Alliance (conflict id 2810, dyad 2360)

Conflict Summary: When the Rwandan genocide ended in July 1994 with the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Front
(FPR) taking Kigali (see conflict id 2810, dyad 2350), 2 million Hutu refugees fled Rwanda, including 1.2
million that went to Zaire. The refugees in Zaire included many of the members of the ex-Rwandan Armed
Forces (ex-FAR) and many members of Interahamwe, an organization of Hutu youth militias that had been
instrumental in the conduct of the genocide. The ex-FAR and Interahamwe used the protection of the
refugee camps in eastern Zaire to regroup and to reorganize in order to launch attacks back into Rwanda. The
continued instability in Western Rwanda resulting from these attacks was the main reason that in 1996
Rwanda supported Laurent Kabila as he attacked the refugee camps and began a campaign that would the
next year remove Zairean President Mobutu from power (see conflict id 1860). Relations between Kigali and
Kabila soured quickly, however, over continued harassment of Western Rwanda by ex-FAR and Interahamwe
based in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC, the former Zaire). By 1998, the intensity of this
harassment had progressively increased as the various Hutu opposition groups based in DRC (including ex-
FAR and Interahamwe) had reorganized and had 10,000 plus troops at their command. Over the next four
years the battle between the Tutsi Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA, the former FPR) and these Hutu
opposition groups continued, but the fighting took place almost exclusively outside the territory of the
Rwanda, both in the DRC and in Burundi. In 2002, a peace agreement between the governments of DRC and
Rwanda meant that the Opposition Alliance could no longer base on Congolese territory and hurt their ability
to continue to wage war. Despite this, the conflict continues at a low level of intensity to this day.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

Several of the various parties in the Opposition Alliance have organized political movements. However, the
Rwandan government considers these organizations to be war criminals and does not allow them to
participate.

Rebestimate: 40,000
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 65,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute provides the following estimates for the troop strength
of the opposition alliance. In 1998, 50,000-65,000 troops; in 1999, 30,000-50,000 troops; in 2000, 30,000-
40,000; in 2001, 30,000-50,000; in 2002, 10,000-12,000. These estimates are in comparison to the following
estimates for the Rwandan army. In 1998, 55,000; in 1999, 2000 and 2001, 40,000-60,000; in 2002, 30,000-
75,000. The Opposition Alliance is not a match for the Rwandan army and has been able to survive because it
has based on the territory of the DRC.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

308

Conflict: Senegal vs. MFDC (conflict id 2820)

Conflict Summary: The Casamance is the southern region of Senegal bordering Guinea-Bissau which is
separated from much of the rest of the country by Gambia. The population of Casamance is primarily from
the Diola ethnic group and is substantially ethnically different from the general Senegalese population. The
Diola have been systematically politically excluded in Senegal in its independent history. In 1947, the
Movement of the Democratic Forces of the Casamance (MFDC) was formed to push for independence for
the region. The MFDC was largely inactive until the 1980s, when it organized political protests, some of
which were met with violence by the state security forces. The MFDC began responding with force and by
1983 the conflict had reached a higher level of intensity. Throughout the last twenty years a series of armed
clashes have occurred between the MFDC and the state security forces. At the same time, a long string of
negotiations have produced several cease-fires, although none of the cease-fires has actually been
implemented. The conflict persists at a low-level equilibrium, with alternating violence and negotiations and
no sign of an impending resolution.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

None of the sources utilized provided any indication that the MFDC participates in the Senegalese political
process.

Rebestimate: 400
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 500
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1991 the MFDC had between 300 and 500 troops. No
estimate is available for any of the other years of the conflict. Additionally, there is no estimate provided of
the military strength of the Senegalese army, however, it is clear that the MFDC could not defeat the
government militarily.

Centcont: no

Following a cease-fire agreement in 1991 the MFDC splintered into two factions: the Northern Front, which
decided to lay down their arms and stop fighting, and a southern front, which continued the armed struggle.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Minorities at Risk Group Profiles

309

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. Government of Armenia and ANM (conflict id 2830)

Conflict Summary: Although the Nagorno-Karabakh has a population which is majority Armenian, since the
1920s, it has been administered by Azerbaijan. In the late 1980s an armed revolt emerged within the Soviet
Union in which the Government of Armenia and the governing body in Nagorno-Karabakh pushed for the
region to break away from Azerbaijan and join Armenia. The Armenian government and Supreme Soviet of
Nagorno-Karabakh waged an armed struggle against the Soviet Union, which imposed direct rule over the
secessionist region. In 1991, the conflict continued, however, because of the dissolution of the Soviet Union
it ceased to be a civil war within the Soviet Union and became a civil war within the newly independent
Azerbaijan (see conflict id 2950).

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The government of Armenia and the Supreme Soviet of the Nagorno-Karabakh were both the legitimate
constitutional governments of those regions of the Soviet Union.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 160,000

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1990 the Republic of Armenia had 160,000 troops. It is not
clear how many of these troops were deployed to the Nagorno-Karabkh conflict.

Newendate: 12/31/1991

The conflict did not end in 1991, however, the Soviet Union ceased to exist in that year and so the conflict
switched from being a civil war within the Soviet Union to a civil war within Azerbaijan (see conflict id 2950).

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

310

Conflict: Soviet Union vs. Azerbaijani Popular Front (conflict id 2840)

Conflict Summary: In the late 1980s, Moscow’s control over the other republics in the Soviet Union
weakened and nationalist movements arose across the Soviet Union. This trend could be seen in the republic
of Azerbaijan as well, where the Azerbaijani Popular Front (APF) emerged in 1989 opposed to the
communist party in Azerbaijan and calling for democratization and independence for the republic. The
government in Moscow was opposed to these moves. The conflict escalated in January 1990, when
demonstrations against the Azerbaijani Communist Party and for secession turned violent and the APF seized
government buildings in the capital, Baku. On January 19, 1990, the Soviet army launched a wide-scale
military action to suppress the rebellion and about 100 people were killed in the ensuing violence. On January
20, the Soviet army captured Baku and by a week later the resistance had been suppressed and the Azerbaijani
Communist Party was restored to full power. The APF was defeated in the violent conflict, however, when
Azerbaijan gained independence in 1991, the leader of the APF became the country’s first president.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

According to the Uppsala Conflict Database, the Azerbaijani Communist Party recognized the APF as an
official opposition party in August 1989.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

None of the available sources offered any indication of the number of troops possessed by the APF.
However, it is clear that the force was much overpowered by the Soviet army.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

311

Conflict: Trinidad and Tobago vs. Jamaat al Muslimeen (conflict id 2850)

Conflict Summary: On July 27, 1990, Jamaat al Muslimeen, an organization of Afro-Trinidadians who had
converted to Islam, attempted a coup d’etat. They took many hostages, including the prime minister, blew up
the police station and seized the television station. They called for new elections within 90 days. Negotiations
between the President and the group over the next few days stalled until on August 1, 1990, the rebels
surrendered to the government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the rebels made a demand for new elections when they attempted the coup d’etat, they were not
direct participants in the domestic political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 250
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that Jamaat al Muslimeen had 250 troops. This force is in comparison
to 2,000 troops for the army.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Data Project

312

Conflict: Djibouti vs. FRUD (conflict id: 2860)

Conflict Summary: The Issa are a majority ethnic group in Djibouti, comprising about 60% of the population
and the Afar are a sizable minority, making up about 35% of the population. In the post-colonial period
Djibouti was run by a one-party government with almost all governmental officials being Issa. The Front for
the Restoration of Unity and Democracy (FRUD) was an Afar organization that in November 1991 launched
an armed struggle against the Djiboutian government to push for multiparty democracy and greater inclusion
of the Afar in the domestic political process. The government responded with force and a war raged for the
next four years. Negotiations began in June 1994, which resulted in an immediate split in FRUD. The major
part of the organization continued to negotiate with the government but a faction of FRUD opposed
negotiations and continued the armed struggle. On December 26, 1994, a peace agreement was reached
between the government and the FRUD (minus the break-away faction) which resulted in a cease-fire and a
power-sharing government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The FRUD was an organization with the stated goals of promoting multiparty democracy and a power-
sharing government. From 1991-1994, however, Djibouti was a one-party state and it was illegal for other
parties to participate.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,500
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 1991-1994 the FRUD had 4,500 troops. This is in
comparison to the government’s 3,400 in 1991, 3,800 in 1992, 3,900 in 1993 and 9,600 in 1994.

Terrcont: yes
Terrname: Parts of northern Djibouti

The Afar are primarily located in northern Djibouti. In 1991, FRUD took control of much of the northern
part of the country. In July 1993, Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that the government launched a
counter-offensive which knocked the Afar back from much of the territory it held in the north.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

313

Conflict: Georgia vs. Anti-Government Alliance (conflict id: 2870, dyad 2420)

Conflict Summary: Georgia left the Soviet Union and became an independent state in April 1991. In May of
that year, Zviad Gamsakhurdia, a Georgian nationalist leader, was elected President in a landslide election.
Shortly after he took power, opposition to Gamsakhurdia grew as he was accused of being an authoritarian
leader and of repressing Georgia’s minority populations. On September 11, 1991, 30 opposition groups
united to demand Gamsakhurdia’s resignation. He refused and armed clashes between supporters and
opponents of the government followed. For the next two months a low-intensity conflict raged in the
Georgian capital, Tbilsi, reaching a peak on December 22, 1991, when the Anti-Government Alliance lay
siege to the Presidential residency which would a few weeks later result in the overthrow of Gamsakhurdia.
He fled the country on January 6, 1992, but quickly rallied supporters, the Zviadists, who waged armed
struggle against the new government to try to restore him to power (see conflict id 2870, dyad 2430).

Notes on Coding:

Rebpolwing: no

The Anti-Government Alliance was a set of organizations opposed to Gamsakhurdia’s rule. These
organizations did not present one coherent political alternative, however.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 13,500
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the Anti-Government Alliance had 13,500 troops in 1991. This
number is in comparison to 7,500-30,000 in the army.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

314

Conflict: Georgia vs. Zviadists (conflict id 2870, dyad 2430)

Conflict Summary: After being deposed in late December 1991 (see conflict id 2870, dyad 2420), former
Georgian President Zviad Gamsakhurdia fled to Armenia. He quickly rallied his supporters, the Zviadists,
and they launched an armed struggle to return him to power. In early 1992, the Zviadists controlled parts of
Western Georgia, however, the force was not able to achieve much military success against the Georgian
government. The conflict continued until the end of 1993 when, on December 31, Gamsakhurdia died.

Notes on Coding:

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Zviadists were the supporters of former Georgian President Zviad Gamsakhurdia, who had been elected
in May 1991. He was overthrown, however, and not allowed to continue as president despite his assertions
that he was the rightful leader of the country.

Rebestimate: 5,750
Rebestlow: 1,500
Rebesthigh: 10,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1993 the Zviadists had 1,500 troops. Keesing’s Record of
World Events in October 1993 wrote that the Zviadists were “said to number some 10,000 in total.” It is not
clear whether the Keesing’s figure refers only to armed supporters of the former President or also includes
unarmed supporters. In comparison, the Georgian government had 20,000 troops in 1993.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

315

Conflict: Haiti vs. Tonton Macoute/Military Faction (conflict id 2880)

Conflict Summary: Haiti has experienced much conflict over the last century. For years the country was ruled
by Francois and then Jean-Claude Duvalier, who were closely allied with Haiti’s landowning elite and had
their own private army, the Tonton Macoute. In 1987, Jean-Claude Duvalier fled into exile, and was replaced
by a civilian-military government. In elections in December 1990, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a Catholic priest
who was a proponent of Haiti’s peasants, won a landslide victory. A coup attempt in early 1991 against the
interim president by a faction of the military, backed by the Tonton Macoute, failed, however, on September
30, 1991, Aristide was overthrown.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Tonton Macoute and the faction of the military they were allied with had ties to supporters of the former
president Jean-Claude Duvalier. In elections in 1990, the former interior minister under Duvalier was barred
from participating.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the Tonton Macoute had 300,000 troops. I believe this must be
a mistake. No other reference to the number of troops possessed by the Tonton Macoute, or to the number
of the military that supported the coup could be found.

316

Conflict: Sierra Leone/United Kingdom vs. AFRC, RUF, Kamajors and ECOMOG (conflict id: 2890).

This conflict is best described in three periods, because there were different constellations of actors in each.

Conflict Summary:

Period 1: Sierra Leone and Kamajors vs. AFRC and RUF
In 1991, the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) led by Foday Sankoh attacked Sierra Leone from Liberia. The
government, supported by Nigeria and Guinea, launched a counterattack against the rebels but were unable
to completely dislodge them. The conflict continued and Sierra Leone’s civilian population suffered a long
string of atrocities. The RUF was able to gain control of the diamond fields and by 1995 had gained enough
strength to launch attacks against Freetown, the capital. In 1995, the military leader Valentine Strasser signed
a contract with a South African mercenary firm, Executive Outcomes, to increase security, and was able to
stop the RUF advance on Freetown and drive the RUF away from the diamond fields. A period of peace
followed and democratic elections in 1996 produced a civilian government led by Tejan Kabbah. Kabbah
pursued negotiations with the RUF and on November 30, 1996, a peace agreement was signed at Abidjan,
Cote D’Ivoire. As part of the settlement Kabbah agreed to ask Executive Outcomes to leave, a decision that
proved fateful as five months later, on May 25, 1997, a successful military coup brought the Armed Forces
Revolutionary Council (AFRC) to power. The AFRC invited the RUF to participate in the military
government.

Period 2: Government of Sierra Leone (AFRC) and RUF vs. Kamajors and ECOMOG
The Kamajors were traditional hunters that had been organized by Kabbah into a private security force to
protect the mining areas of southeastern Sierra Leone. In the days after the coup that brought the AFRC to
power, a spokesman for the Kamajors said that the organization would fight to restore Kabbah to power.
The Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) came to the support of
Kabbah and in March 1998, ECOMOG troops took Freetown, removing the AFRC and restoring Kabbah to
power.

Period 3: Government of Sierra Leone, ECOMOG and United Kingdom vs. RUF and AFRC
The RUF and AFRC continued to battle the Kabbah government, which now was backed by ECOMOG
forces. In July 1999, a power-sharing arrangement was reached between the Kabbah government and the
RUF which gave Sankoh the position of Vice President and put him in charge of the ministry which oversaw
diamond extraction. The AFRC, which was not included in the agreement, continued to wage armed struggle
against the government and even clashed with the RUF. However, the AFRC was no match for the
government and ECOMOG without RUF support and quickly became irrelevant as a fighting force. The
power-sharing agreement with the RUF did not last long and Sankoh quickly resumed fighting. In 2000 as the
conflict re-escalated, the United Nations began deploying a peacekeeping mission and the United Kingdom
deployed a fairly robust force, first with the intention of evacuating British citizens but the force soon began
conducting joint military operations with the Sierra Leone army. Sankoh was arrested in May 2000 and a new
cease-fire agreement with the RUF was reached on November 10, 2000, resulting in a de-escalation, although
the conflict still continued at a low level of intensity.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Sierra Leone vs. RUF

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

317

Although the Revolutionary United Front existed exclusively as a rebel group for much of the conflict, it
registered as a political party in November 1999 so that it could compete in national elections. It was allowed
to do so.

Rebestimate: 5,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimates the troop strength of the
Revolutionary United Front throughout the conflict as follows. In 1995, the RUF had 2,000 troops. In 1996,
the RUF had 2,000-4,000. In 1997, the RUF had 3,000-5,000. In 1998, the RUF and AFRC together had
15,000. In 1999, the RUF and AFRC together had 45,000 (SIPRI says that many of these were just ad-hoc
armed rebels not really trained forces). In 2000, the RUF had 15,000. This is in comparison to the following
estimates for the Sierra Leone government: in 1995, 5,000-6,000 troops; in 1996, 12,000-18,000 troops; in
1997, 14,000 troops; in 1998, 30,000 troops (plus 10,000-15,000 from ECOMOG); in 1999, 15,000-20,000
(plus 12,000 from ECOMOG) and in 2000, 10,000-15,000 (plus 800 from United Kingdom).

Mobcap: low

The RUF was never able to mobilize much popular support, instead operating by terrorizing the local
population and by gaining control of Sierra Leone’s diamond mines.

Dyad: Sierra Leone vs. AFRC

Rebpolwing: no

The AFRC was the military government established through a coup in 1997 that was overthrown by
ECOMOG in 1998. After that they tried to gain control militarily but not by competing in the domestic
political process.

Rebestimate: 8,000
Rebestlow: 2,000
Rebesthigh: 14,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates the troop strength of the AFRC as follows. In 1997, it had 8,000-
14,000 troops. In 1998, it had 2,000-4,000 troops. In 1999, no estimate is given. Clearly, the AFRC was at
least equal to the government forces when it was able to overthrow them in a coup d’etat, however, by 1999,
the fighting power of the force had decreased significantly.

Dyad: Sierra Leone vs. ECOMOG

Rebpolwing: does not apply

ECOMOG is a regional organization and so did not participate in the domestic political process.

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: stronger

318

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1998, ECOMOG had between 10,000
and 15,000 troops in Sierra Leone.

Dyad: Sierra Leone vs. Kamajors

Rebpolwing: no

The Kamajors were traditional hunters who were supporters of former President Kabbah. They fought
against the RUF to restore him to power.

Rebestimate: 23,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 37,000

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 1997 the Kamajors had between 10,000 and 37,000 troops.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

International Crisis Group Report “Sierra Leone: Time for a New Military and Political Strategy,”
April 11, 2001.

319

Conflict: Turkey vs. Devrimci Sol (conflict id: 2900)

Conflict Summary: Devrimci Sol (Dev Sol) was a leftist organization formed in the 1970s to push for a
Marxist revolution in Turkey. There was some armed struggle between the government and the group;
however, the conflict reached a higher (although still quite low) level of intensity in 1991 when Dev Sol began
challenging the American military presence in Turkey during the Persian Gulf War. The group was always
very small and was only able to conduct a few small-scale terrorist attacks, and by the end of 1992 had been
virtually completely defeated by the Ankara and Istanbul police forces. The group still exists, although it has
been beset by fractionalization since 1992, but the armed conflict has not continued at a noticeable level of
intensity.

Rebpolwing: unclear
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

Dev Sol is a political organization dedicated to revolution. It is not clear if it has a political wing that
participates at all in Turkish domestic politics.

Rebestimate: 100
Rebestlow: 10
Rebesthigh: 100
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that in 1991 Dev Sol had between 50 and 100 militants and in 1992
it had between 10 and 100 militants. This is a much smaller force than the police forces of Ankara and
Istanbul, not to mention the entire Turkish army.

Newstartdate: 7/13/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that on July 13, 1991, the Istanbul police conducted raids on Dev Sol
hideouts in Istanbul, and that 11 Dev Sol militants were killed.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

320

Conflict: Yugoslavia vs. Republic of Slovenia (conflict id: 2910)

Conflict Summary: Slovenia was one of the richest republics within the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. In
the 1980s, Yugoslavia went through a period of severe economic recession and, at the same time, many of the
ethnic groups in Yugoslavia began clamouring for greater autonomy from the national government, up to
independence. In 1990 a pro-independence leader, Milan Kucan, was elected President, and tensions
increased between the national Yugoslav government (which was becoming increasingly dominated by Serbia)
and the Kucan government. On June 25, 1991, the Republic of Slovenia declared independence from
Yugoslavia, and the Yugoslav National Army quickly intervened to try to keep the region from seceding. The
Yugoslav Army was militarily stronger than the Slovenian national guard, however, the Slovenian forces were
able to use guerilla warfare tactics to inflict high costs on the Yugoslav army. At negotiations brokered by the
European Community in July, 1991, a ceasefire was reached and the Republic of Slovenia experienced de-
facto independence until May 1992, when it was recognized by the United Nations and became officially
independent.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It was the legitimate government of the Republic of Slovenia that declared the republic independent from
Yugoslavia.

Rebestimate: 50,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 70,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated that in 1991 the Republic of Slovenia had
between 30,000 and 68,000 troops. The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that it had between 60,000 and
70,000 troops. This number is significantly smaller than the 169,000 troops in the Yugoslav National Army,
however, the Yugoslav National Army faced armed conflict in a number of rebellions and the Slovenian
forces had the advantage of being able to use guerilla tactics.

Mobcap: high

Slovenia had the largest percentage of its population in favor of independence of all the republics in
Yugoslavia that seceded.

Sources: ?

321

Conflict: Yugoslavia vs. Croatian Irregulars and Republic of Croatia (conflict id: 2920)

Conflict Summary: The republic of Yugoslavia had been a federal republic made up of several different
autonomous regions throughout the Cold War. In the 1980s, however, the unity of the state began to be
challenged after the dictator Tito, who had been very successful at holding the country together, died. Many
of the various ethnic groups in Yugoslavia, including Croatians began pushing for greater control over their
own affairs. At the same time Serbia, led by Slobodan Milosevic, began to exert more control over affairs at
the national level. Prior to 1991 armed conflict had occurred in Croatia, but the conflict in Yugoslavia reached
a new level of intensity as first Slovenia and then, on June 25, 1991, Croatia declared independence. The
Yugoslav army followed the leader of the Serbian government, and 1991 saw extreme conflict between the
army and both the newly formed Croatian army and a set of mercenaries the “Croatian Irregulars”) pushing
for the independence of Croatia. The conflict was not resolved at the end of 1991, however, as Croatia
became an independent country in 1992 the conflict ceased to be a civil war within Yugoslavia, and instead
shifted to a civil war within Serbia, with the Yugoslav army supporting the Serbian population there’s push
for secession and unification with Serbia (see conflict id 2970).

Notes on Coding:

Dyad: Yugoslavia vs. Croatian Irregulars
Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Croatian Irregulars were really a collection of mercenaries that waged conflict to promote Croatian
interests in Yugoslavia, including independence. Some of these groups were allied with political parties that
were allowed to participate in Croatian politics.

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the Croatian Irregulars had between 10,000 and 15,000 troops.
This number is in comparison to the 169,000 troops of the Yugoslav National Army (JNA).

Centcontrol: no

The Croatian Irregulars were really a set of several independent militias rather than one unified insurgent
group.

Newendate: 11/18/1991

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the Croatian Irregulars lost their last major stronghold on
November 18, 1991, and ceased to function as an independent force after that, with many of their members
becoming incorporated into the Croatian army.

Dyad: Yugoslavia vs. Republic of Croatia

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It was the legitimate government of Croatia, led by Franco Tudjman, that declared the independence of the
Republic.

322

Rebestimate: 45,000
Rebestlow: 30,000
Rebesthigh: 60,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1991 the Republic of Croatia had
between 30,000 and 42,000 troops. However, the Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in October 1991 the
Croatian army comprised 42,000 troops but that by the end of November, 1991, it had 60,000. These
numbers are considerably lower than the total Yugoslav National Army force of 169,000, however, the
Yugoslav army was engaged in more than one conflict at a time and so could not deploy its total force to
Croatia.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbook

323

Conflict: Algeria vs. Islamic Groups (conflict id 2930)

Conflict Summary: The secular Algerian government has faced a challenge from secular Islamic groups since
the 1980s. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, there were two main groups challenging the government which
were dedicated to making Islamic law (Sharia) the law of Algeria. The first, the Armed Islamic Movement
(MIA), continued a violent campaign in the 1980s but was not able to accomplish much. The second group,
the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), chose to pursue a political, rather than a violent strategy, and competed in
elections in 1991. The FIS had much more success and was set to win the second round of elections when
the military intervened and cancelled the elections. Following the cancellation, armed conflict broke out in
Algeria between Islamist groups and the government. The FIS stayed out of the combat for the first two
years but by January, 1993, had endorsed the armed struggle and merged with the renewed MIA.

The war in Algeria between the government and the Islamist groups was very bloody, resulting in

somewhere around 100,000 deaths. The conflict was at a high level of intensity between 1993 and 2001.
Throughout the conflict, new groups appeared, many of whom were more radical than the main opposition
group, the FIS. In 1993, the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) began waging conflict and had a platform of
opposition to any negotiations with the government. In 1996, the government decided to switch tactics and
created paramilitary groups in the villages. In response, the GIA also switched tactics and began committing
large-scale massacres of civilians. By 1997, the main locus of conflict has shifted away from the government-
FIS axis to the government-GIA dyad and the FIS decided to abandon its armed struggle and declared a
unilateral ceasefire. In 2000, the army and FIS signed a peace agreement which granted amnesty to all
FIS/MIA members.

The GIA refused to sign on to the agreement. Additionally, the GIS policy of carrying out civilian

massacres led to the splintering of the group and another new group emerged, the Dawa wal Jihad, which also
refused to accept the negotiations but focused its attacks on governmental security forces, rather than
civilians.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Algeria vs. FIS

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The FIS started out as a political movement and was set to win elections in 1991 when they were overturned.

Rebestimate: 12,500
Rebestlow: 10,000
Rebesthigh: 15,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that in 1993 and 1994, the FIS had 10,000-
15,000 troops (they do not have estimates for the other years of the conflict). This is in comparison to
139,000-300,000 across the course of the conflict for the Algerian government.

Mobcap: high

The FIS were set to win elections when they were cancelled in 1991.

Dyad: Algeria vs. Exile and Redemption

Rebpolwing: no

324

Exile and Redemption was a militant organization that believed that it was not possible to create an Islamic
state through elections, it would have to be accomplished militarily.

rebestimate: unclear
rebstrength: much weaker

None of the sources give any indication of the number of troops possessed by Exile and Redemption.
However, they were no match for the Algerian government and were not able to accomplish much militarily
across the course of the conflict.

Dyad: Algeria vs. GIA

Rebpolwing: no

GIA was an organization that rejected negotiations of any type and sought to make Algeria an Islamic state
through armed struggle. The organization did not have a political wing.

Rebestimate: 1,525
Rebestlow: 50
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database provides the following estimates for the troop strength of the GIA: In 1993,
1994 and 1995: no estimate: in 1996: 2,000-3,000; in 1997: 50-100; in 1998: 2,000-3,000; in 1999: less than
3000; in 2000, 2001 and 2002: less than 1500; in 2003: 100. These estimates are in comparison to the
following estimates for the Algerian army: in 1993: 121,700-139,000; in 1994, 1995 and 1996: 121,700-
150,000; in 1997: 124,000-170,000; in 1998: 122,000-270,000; in 1999: 122,000-300,000; in 2000 and 2001:
124,000-300,000; in 2002: 136,700-400,000; in 2003: 127,000.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: low

The GIA does have a central command structure. However, the organization splintered in the late 1990s over
the tactics that it pursued.

Dyad: Algeria vs. Dawa wal Jihad

I could find no information about this group.

Dyad: Algeria vs. Expiation and Sin

I could find no information about this group.

Dyad: Algeria vs. The Brigades of God

I could find no information about this group

Dyad: Algeria vs. The Faithful of the Sermon

I could find no information about this group

Sources:

326

Conflict: Angola vs. FLEC (conflict id 2940)

Conflict Summary: Cabinda is a region which belongs to Angola, even though it is cut off from the rest of the
country by a small stretch of territory belonging to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (the former Zaire).
Cabinda is a small area which is very rich, containing a majority of the oil reserves found in Angola. Some
politicians in Cabinda have pushed for the independence of the region from Angola since before the end of
the colonial period. Since Angola gained independence from Portugal in 1975, there has been an armed
struggle between various factions of the Front for the Liberation of the Cabinda Enclave (FLEC) and the
Angolan government, although this conflict has been greatly overshadowed by the conflict with Jonas
Savimbi’s Union for the Total Liberation of Angola (UNITA, see conflict id 2310). In the 1990s, the conflict
has reached a higher intensity, although still never producing more than a few hundred battledeaths in a single
year. A long series of negotiations in the 1990s failed to produce a comprehensive peace agreement or serious
cease-fire agreement. In 2002, after the Angolan government signed a peace agreement with UNITA it
shifted a greater number of troops to Cabinda and began pursuing that war with greater vigor, increasing the
number of casualties. However, despite the increased effort, the government has not, as of the end of 2003,
been able to completely defeat the FLEC.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The FLEC has been pushing for the secession of Cabinda from Angola since before Angola became
independence. In national elections which were held in 1992, the FLEC called for a boycott of the election
and did not participate.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 900
rebstrength: much weaker

There is little information on the number of troops controlled by the FLEC. The Uppsala conflict database
identifies two factions of the FLEC, the FLEC-R, which in 1992 they estimate as having 500 troops, and the
FLEC-FAC, which in 1994 and 1996 they estimate as having 400 troops. The estimate for the conglomerate
group provided above, therefore, is those two numbers together. This number of troops is miniscule
compared to the 100,000 the Angolan army is believed to possess.

Centcontrol: no

The FLEC has been beset by fractionalization since its inception.

Mobcap: moderate

The Uppsala conflict database reports that the FLEC has the support of 90% of the population of Cabinda.

Source:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

327

Conflict: Azerbaijan vs. Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia (conflict id: 2950)

Conflict Summary: The region of Nagorno-Karabakh has been one under dispute for decades. The
population of Nagorno-Karabakh is majority Armenian, however, when the region was in the Soviet Union it
was placed under the control of Armenia. As the Soviet Union began to decline in the late 1980s, the
Armenian population in Nagorno-Karabakh began pushing for independence from the Soviet Union and to
be merged with an independent Armenia (see conflict id 2830), however, in 1991 when Azerbaijan declared
itself an independent state it included Nagorno-Karabakh in the declaration. What had been a conflict
between the Soviet Union and Armenia/Nagorno-Karabakh shifted to be a conflict between the newly
independent Azerbaijan and the newly independent Armenia and the Nagorno Karabakh. The conflict raged
at a high level of intensity from 1992 to 1994. Negotiations in Moscow on May 2-4, 1994, produced a cease-
fire agreement and an agreement by parties for the deployment of a peacekeeping force. Ten years later the
conflict has been effectively “managed” but not “resolved,” peacekeeping forces keep the peace and
Nagorno-Karabakh has de-facto independence, but the final status of the province remains unresolved.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Azerbaijan vs. Republic of Nagorno-Karabkh

Rebpolwing: no
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The forces of the Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh battling the Azerbaijani government began their
secessionist campaign before there was an independent Azerbaijan. After Azerbaijan gained independence
they pushed for secession, and so did not participate politically in the national Azerbaijani government.

Rebestimate: 10,000
Rebestlow: 1,500
Rebesthigh: 10,00
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates the troop strength for the Republic of
Nagorno-Karabakh throughout the conflict as follows: In 1992, the republic had 1,500-7,000 troops. In 1993
and 1994, the Republic had 10,000. This estimate is in comparison to the following estimates for Azerbaijan:
in 1992, the government had 20,000-25,000 troops; in 1993, it had 42,600. In 1994, it had 56,000.

Dyad: Azerbaijan vs. Armenia

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Armenia was an external state involved in the Azerbaijan conflict and so did not participate in the domestic
Azerbaijani political process.

Rebestimate: 35,000
Rebestlow: 20,000
Rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates the number of troops possessed by Armenia
as follows. In 1992, Armenia had 30,000-50,000 troops. In 1993, Armenia had 20,000 troops. In 1994, no
estimate is given. This is in comparison to the following estimates for Azerbaijan: in 1992, the government

329

Conflict: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbian irregulars, and
Yugoslavia (conflict id: 2960)

Conflict Summary: Bosnia and Herzegovina was a Yugoslav republic with a plurality Muslim population
(approximately 40% of the population) but a sizable (about 30%) Serbian population. In the early 1990s, as
Yugoslavia began to crumble, the leadership in Bosnia decided that it would be better off as an independent
state. On March 1, 1992, Bosnia and Herzegovina declared itself independent, which prompted conflict
between the Bosnian government and the Serbian population there, who feared being a minority population
in the region. On April 7, 1992, a Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was proclaimed, and the new
Republic quickly had the backing of the Yugoslav National Army (JNA) and also gained support from
“Serbian irregulars”—Serbian militias based in Serbia and Croatia. The new Bosnian state was at a
disadvantage as it did not have a standing army, but rather a territorial defense force, and in the early period
of the war the Bosnian Serbs, with the help of their allies, were able to consolidate control over much of
eastern Bosnia. A policy of “ethnic cleansing” which led to the death of tens of thousands of Bosnian
Muslims in the Serbian Republic brought international attention to the conflict and pressure on the Serbian
combatants. In 1993, Yugoslavia renounced claims to Bosnia and the Serbian government stopped officially
supporting the Serbian Republic. Unofficial support still continued to flow, however. As the conflict
continued the Bosnian army grew stronger and continued human rights violations led to greater international
pressure, culminating in a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) led bombing campaign. In the fall of
1995 a series of peace agreements were forged and on December 14, 1995, the Dayton Peace Accords, a
comprehensive peace agreement, divided Bosnia into ethnic zones and established a power-sharing
governmental arrangement, and a massive United Nations peacekeeping force was deployed to the country to
aid implementation.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Serbian irregulars

Rebpolwing: no

The Serbian irregulars were Serbian militias from Croatia and Bosnia and they did not participate in the
domestic political process in Bosnia.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: weaker

None of the sources provided any information on the number of Serbian irregulars in Bosnia and
Herzegovina. It is clear that, on their own, the Serbian irregulars were weaker than the Bosnian government
forces.

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina declared itself as an independent republic and established a
government. It was not recognized as independent, however.

Rebestimate: 62,500
Rebestlow: 40,000
Rebestimate: 85,000
Rebstrength: parity

330

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks report the troop strength of the Serbian
Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina over the course of the conflict as follows. In 1992, the republic had
40,000-48,000 troops. In 1993, the republic had 80,000 troops. In 1994, the republic had 50,000 to 80,000
troops. In 1995, the republic had 75,000 to 85,000 troops. These troop numbers were smaller than the total
armed force of the Bosnian republic at the peak of its power, however, the Serbian Republic received support
from the Yugoslav National Army and the Serbian irregulars.

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Yugoslavia

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Yugoslavia was an external state intervening in the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina and so did not
participate in the domestic political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 136,500
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks reports that in 1992 the Yugoslav National
Army (JNA) had 135,000 troops and that in 1993 the JNA had 136,500 troops. It is not clear how many of
these troops were deployed to Bosnia. In the latter years of the conflict the JNA was officially out of the
conflict, although it continued to provide support to the other combatants. In any case, it is clear that
throughout the conflict the JNA was stronger than the Bosnian army.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

331

Conflict: Croatia vs. Serbian Republic of Krajina, Serbian Irregulars, and Yugoslavia (conflict id: 2970)

Conflict Summary: The collapse of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s led to a number of
very bloody conflicts (see for example conflict ids. 2960, 3040, 3050, and 3210). Yugoslavia had been made
up of a number of republics, most of which had a majority ethnic population that was dominant but also had
a minority population that was a majority in another republic. The republic of Croatia was majority Croat, but
there was a sizable Serbian population as well. In 1990, when it was clear that Croatia was on the path to
independence, Serbs in Croatia began to clamour for self-determination and declared an autonomous Serbian
Republic of Krajina. Conflict had already broken out before Croatia gained formal independence in 1992
when the new constitution of the Republic of Yugoslavia renounced claims to the former republic. In 1992
the government of Croatia fought to protect its territory against three groups, the “government” forces of the
Serbian Republic of Krajina, Serbian militias (the Serbian Irregulars), and the army of the Republic of
Yugoslavia, which was dominated by Serbia. These various forces allied against the Croatian government had
different goals, with the Serbian Republic of Krajina fighting to protect the rights of Serbs within Croatia but
some of the Serbian irregulars pushing for the Serbian Republic to break away from Croatia and join with
Serbia. The international community was involved in trying to bring about a peaceful end to the conflict from
the beginning. In February 2002, the United Nations deployed a 14,000 strong peacekeeping force with a
mandate to facilitate the disarmament of Serbian enclaves within Croatia. The force was unable to prevent
continued clashes, however, and the conflict continued through 1993. A cease-fire was signed between the
Croat government and the Serbian Republic of Krajina in December 1993 and the conflict was largely
inactive in 1994. In 1995, however, fighting flared up again as the Croatian army fought to regain territory
captured by the Serbian Republic. Talks continued throughout the year and in December 1995, the parties
signed the Dayton Peace Accords, a comprehensive peace agreement dealing with all of the conflicts in the
former Yugoslavia, and it was agreed that the Serbian-held territories would eventually be integrated back into
Croatia.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Croatia vs. Serbian Irregulars

Rebpolwing: no

The Serbian Irregulars were Serbian militias based in Croatia. They did not participate in the domestic
political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 16,000
Rebstrenth: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated that in 1992 the Serbian Irregulars
comprised 16,000 troops. This was considerably weaker than the Croatian government forces.

Dyad: Croatia vs. Serbian Republic of Krajina

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Serbian Republic of Krajina established a government and declared autonomy and so acted as a political
unit. They were not recognized as autonomous by the Croatian government, however.

Rebestimate: 42,500
Rebestlow: 35,000
Rebesthigh: 50,000

332

Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimated that in 1995 the Serbian Republic of Krajina
had between 35,000 and 50,000 troops. This was a weaker force than that possessed by the Croatian
government, who in 1995 were estimated to have 100,000 to 110,000 troops.

Dyad: Croatia vs. Yugoslavia

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Yugoslavia was an external state intervening on behalf of Croatian Serbs and so did not participate in the
domestic political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 136,500
Rebstrength: stronger

The total size of the Yugoslav army was 136,500 troops. It is not clear what percentage of these forces were
deployed to help the Croatian Serbs.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

333

Conflict: Egypt vs. Islamists Organizations (conflict id: 2980)

Conflict Summary: For the last several decades Egypt’s secular government has been challenged by those who
would rather see an Islamic government similar to that in Iran. In the 1980s there was some conflict in Egypt
between the government and Islamist rebels (the most notable event being the assassination of President
Anwar Sadat) but this conflict was tempered because many of the militant Islamists had gone to Afghanistan
to battle the Soviet Union there. In the early 1990s many of them returned to Egypt and by 1993 the conflict
was causing at least 25 deaths per year. The conflict mainly involved violent clashes between police officers
and members of the Islamic groups, however, there were some massacres of civilians and other terrorist
actions undertaken by the groups. The most extreme example was a massacre by al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya at
Luxor in 1997 that resulted in the deaths of 60 people, primarily tourists. After the massacre at Luxor the
ability of these groups to mobilize supporters was severely diminished and by the end of 1998 most violence
between these groups and the Egyptian government had stopped.

Notes on Coding

Note: There is very little information about this conflict. In particular, there is almost no information that
would allow for differentiating between the three groups identified as participants.

Dyad: Egypt vs. al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya

Rebpolwing: no

Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya is primarily a terrorist organization that has operated through political assassination. It
has not openly participated in the Egyptian political process.

Rebestimate: 6,000
Rebestlow: 3,000
Rebesthigh: 9,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that all Islamist organizations in Egypt comprised somewhere
between 5,000 and 15,000 members from 1993 to 1995. The database also says that Al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya is
by far the largest of these groups so I have estimated their troop strength as 60% of that total number, with
the best estimate being the middle of the range. Clearly the group is considerably weaker than the Egyptian
government.

Dyad: Egypt vs. al-Jihad al-Islamiy

Rebpolwing: no

Al-Jihad al-Islamiy is primarily a terrorist organization that has operated through political assassination. It has
not openly participated in the Egyptian political process.

Rebestimate: 2,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that all Islamist organizations in Egypt comprised somewhere
between 5,000 and 15,000 members from 1993 to 1995. The database also says that al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya is
by far the largest of these groups so I have estimated the troop strength of al-Jihad al-Islamiy as 20% of the

334

total number, with the best estimate being the middle of the range provided. Clearly the group is much
weaker than the Egyptian government.

Dyad: Egypt vs. Tala i al-Fath

Rebpolwing: no

Tala i al-Fath is primarily a terrorist organization that has operated through political assassination. It has not
openly participated in the Egyptian political process.

Rebestimate: 2,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that all Islamist organizations in Egypt comprised somewhere
between 5,000 and 15,000 members from 1993 to 1995. The database also says that al-Gamaa al-Islamiyya is
by far the largest of these groups so I have estimated the troop strength of Tala i al-Fath as 20% of the total
number, with the best estimate being the middle of the range provided. Clearly the group is much weaker
than the Egyptian government.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

335

Conflict: Georgia vs. Republic of Abkhazia (conflict id: 2990)

Conflict Summary: When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 Georgia, which had been one of the “Soviet
Socialist Republics” declared independence. Not all of the population of Georgia was supportive of
independence, however, and in particular the country’s Abkhazian population was opposed to it. Tensions
between the Abkhazian region and the Georgian national government increased until July 23, 1992, when an
independent Republic of Abkhazia was declared. The Georgian national government was unwilling to allow
the Republic to go and declared it illegal, and dispatched troops from the Georgian army to Abkhazia in
August 1992. The Georgian troops captured Suchumi, the capital of Abkhazia, but only held it for a month
until it was recaptured by Abkhaz forces. In September 1992, the first in a series of ceasefires was signed but
little progress was made on implementation and violence continued. The conflict reached a stalemate in late
1993 with neither side able to make much more progress and a cease-fire was signed on December 1, 1993.
Negotiations continued in 1994 with some progress being made and in May 1994 a Russian peacekeeping
force was deployed to keep the two sides separate. Although the conflict has stayed latent and violence has
been largely avoided for the last ten years the conflict cannot be called resolved because there are still
fundamental differences between the two sides.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It was the governing body of the autonomous republic of Abkhazia, the “Supreme Soviet” that declared
independence in 1992.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 5,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports that the Republic of Abkhazia had 5,000
troops in 1993. This number is compared to 20,000 troops possessed by the Georgian government.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

336

Conflict: Georgia vs. Republic of South Ossetia (conflict id: 3000)

Conflict Summary: When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the former Soviet republic of Georgia became
an independent state. The new government in Georgia was led by Zviad Gamsakhurdia who expressed a
strong pro-Georgia ideology. This ideology alienated some of the minority ethnic groups in Georgia,
including the inhabitants of South Ossetia. In December 1991, the government of South Ossetia voted to
declare independence and to reintegrate with the Russian federation, and in January 1992 a referendum for
independence passed with an overwhelming majority. The Georgian army was deployed to South Ossetia,
however, at the same time as this conflict was occurring Gamsakhurdia was under attack and troops were
pulled back to defend him in Tbilsi, the Georgian capital. When Gamsakhurdia fled to Armenia a new
president, Eduard Shevardnadze took over. Shevardnadze maintained a policy opposed to Ossetian
independence. However, he also expressed a willingness to negotiate with the region. On June 24, 1992, the
two sides agreed to a ceasefire and to participate in a peacekeeping mission that would involve equal numbers
of troops from Georgia, South Ossetia and Russia, and the conflict has been largely contained since then. The
conflict is still not terminated, as the fundamental question of South Ossetia’s status is unresolved, but the
violence has been largely contained.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The South Ossetian government declared independence and their call was backed by a popular referendum in
the region.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events reported in July 2002 that the South Ossetians had 3,000 nationalist
fighters.

Centcont: no

Keesing’s Record of World Events also reported in July 2002 that there was no unified command structure
for these 3,000 troops.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

337

Conflict: Moldova vs. Dneistr Republic (conflict id: 3010)

Conflict Summary: Moldova gained independence from the Soviet Union on August 27, 1991. At the time of
independence, the Moldovan government put in place a series of policies aimed at shifting the country away
from the Russian language and culture and more toward Romanian language and culture, prompting fears
among the country’s other ethnic groups that the government would eventually push for unification with
Romania. The Dneistr region of Moldova had a population that was primarily Russian and Ukranian. On
September 2, 1991, the Supreme Soviet of the Dneistr voted to secede and join the Soviet Union. The
government of Moldova refused to let the region go and violence broke out between the two groups. The
conflict stayed at a low level until violence escalated in early 1992. The parties began negotiating in March
1992, signing and then breaking a ceasefire, but a lasting ceasefire was signed on July 21, 1992, between
Moldova and Russia (the Dneistr was not a signatory to the agreement) ended the violence. The conflict is
still not completely settled, as the fundamental issue of the political status of the Dneistr region has not been
resolved, but it has been a peaceful conflict since July 1992.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

It was the governing body of the Dniestr region, the Supreme Soviet, that declared independence in
September 1991.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 4,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in 1992 the Dniestr region had 4,000 troops at its disposal. This
is the same number that the Database identifies the Moldovan government as possessing.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

338

Conflict: Tajikistan vs. Movement for Peace in Tajikistan (conflict id: 3020, dyad 2620)

Conflict Summary: In early November, 1998, the renegade Tajik First Brigade, under the command of Col
Makhmud Khudoberdiyev, invaded the Tajik region of Leninabad and killed police and military officers there.
Khudoberdiyev had in August 1997 attempted a coup which failed. The army responded with force to the
invasion of Leninabad and within days the Movement for Peace in Tajikistan forces had been routed and
forced to flee the country, and the conflict was over.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The supporters of the armed faction of the military led by Khudoberdiyev wanted the group to have 40% of
the seats in the coalition government. The group was viable for so little time that it is unclear whether it was
legal or not, in either case, it had virtually no impact on politics in Tajikistan.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the Movement for Peace in Tajikistan had 1,000 troops in the
conflict, as compared to 5,000-7,000 possessed by the Tajik government.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

339

Conflict: Tajikistan, Russia and Uzbekistan vs. UTO (conflict id: 3020, dyad 2620)

Conflict Summary: Tajikistan gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. In the years following
independence, the Supreme Soviet of Tajikistan, the same party which had held power during the Soviet
period, continued to have the majority in the government. Shortly after independence, however, groups in
Tajikistan which had been excluded from the political process during the Soviet period began protesting and
pushing for greater involvement in the newly independent Tajikistan. There were three major parties
clamoring for a greater role in the political process, they were the Islamic Renaissance Party, the Democratic
Party and the Renaissance Movement, and the three groups collectively became known as the United Tajik
Opposition (UTO). Armed skirmishes between the government and the UTO were frequent, and the conflict
was at its peak of intensity in 1992 and 1993, with the conflict resulting in 20,000 battledeaths by the end of
1993. A series of negotiations and cease-fires occurred over the next three years and the intensity of the
conflict decreased significantly. On June 27, 1997, a final peace agreement was signed in Moscow, which
specified that the UTO would be given 30% of the seats in the government and that UTO troops would be
integrated into the Tajik army.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The United Tajik Opposition was made up of three political parties that were pushing for a greater role in the
political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 16,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) estimated that in 1992 the Popular Democratic
Army (later the UTO) had 16,000 troops. In the subsequent years of the conflict no estimate is available for
their troop strength. In 1993, SIPRI estimated that the Tajik government only had 2,000-3,000 troops at its
disposal; however, its forces were supported by Russia and Uzbekistan both of which had much greater
military might than the UTO.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

340

Conflict: Azerbaijan vs. Husseinov Military Faction and OPON Forces (conflict id: 3030)

This conflict is best described in two periods, one for each dyad.

Conflict Summary:
Period1
Azerbaijan gained independence upon the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and in June 1992 Abulfaz
Elchibey was elected President. Opposition to the Elchibey regime began almost immediately, however, and
in early 1993 the President dismissed Suret Husseinov (note: Keesing’s refers to this person as Surat
Guseinov), a colonel in the military who Elchibey accused of plotting a coup. On June 4, 1993, Elchibey
ordered the Azerbaijani army to attack the 709

brigade, the unit loyal to Husseinov. Husseinov’s forces won

and the victory prompted the leader to march on Baku, the capital, which he did largely unimpeded, and on
June 18, 1993, Elchibey fled to Moscow. He was replaced by Heydar Aliyev, who negotiated with Husseinov
and agreed to let him become Premier Minister, and on June 25, 1993, the legislature voted to transfer
executive powers to Aliyev and impeach Elchibey. On October 3, 1993, Aliyev was elected president.

Period 2
Over the next two years a number of other political tensions escalated into violence. The most dramatic was a
conflict between Aliyev and the OPON militia—a police militia attached to the Interior Ministry. On March
13, 1995 the OPON mutinied and attacked a police station in Baku and seized buildings in the northwest of
the country. In response Aliyev ordered the militia disbanded and on March 17, 1993, the army attacked the
militia, soundly defeating it.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Azerbaijan vs. Husseinov Military Faction

Rebpolwing: no

Husseinov was a colonel in the Azerbaijani military and had not participated in the political process.

Rebpolestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources identified the number of troops possessed by Husseinov. However, his forces were able
to soundly defeat the government forces they came into conflict with.

Dyad: Azerbaijan vs. OPON

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The OPON was a police militia under the command of the Interior Ministry. Although shortly after the
conflict broke out on March 13, 1997, the OPON was disbanded, at the time of the outbreak of conflict it
was a legal organization.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 3,000
rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in March 1995 reported that the OPON contained 3,000 troops. Clearly it
was no match for the Azerbaijani army.

342

Conflict: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia (conflict id: 3040)

Conflict Summary: At peace talks to resolve the various Bosnian conflicts (see conflict ids 2960 and 3050) in
1993, the President of Bosnia agreed in principal to a plan to divide Bosnia into three ethnic regions. One
member of the State Presidency, Fikret Abdic, disagreed with the proposed ethnic division and argued that
inter-ethnic relations were good in his region of Bihacka Krajina in northwest Bosnia. In September 1993
Abdic declared an “Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia” where all ethnic groups would be welcomed
and treated equally. The Bosnian government denounced his declaration of an autonomous region as illegal
and deployed a small number of troops to defeat his forces, however, the Bosnia Serb and Croat armies
agreed to support Abdic to keep goods flowing to their front lines. Additionally, the Bosnian government
could not afford to divert very many forces from the front lines of those other conflicts. The conflict
continued at a low level of intensity until in 1994, after the implementation of a peace deal between Bosnia
and the Croatian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnian President Izetbegovic and Croatian President
Franco Tudjman agreed to cooperate militarily. On August 6, 1996, the combined armies of Croatia and
Bosnia attacked Abdic’s forces and the Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia was soundly defeated.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The leader of the Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia, Fikret Abdic, was a Bosnian politician who was
unhappy with the proposed division of the country along ethnic lines.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker

No information was available on the number of troops possessed by the Autonomous Province of Western
Bosnia. However it is clear that the military force possessed by Abdic was completely outmatched by the
Bosnian government, the region was only able to challenge the government as long as it did because the vast
majority of the Bosnian army was deployed to battle either the Serbs or the Croats.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

343

Conflict: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Croatia, Croatian Irregulars, and Croatian Republic of Bosnia and
Herzegovina (conflict id: 3050)

Conflict Summary: The federal republic of Yugoslavia dissolved in the early 1990s and in 1992 Bosnia and
Herzegovina declared itself an independent state. Bosnia and Herzegovina was a state with a majority Muslim
population but also had a significant Serb and Croat population. In 1992, conflict erupted between the
Bosnian government and the Serb population there (see conflict id 2960). In July 1992, the Croats living in
Bosnia declared an autonomous Croat Republic in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Over the next nine months a few
more violent clashes occurred and in April 1993 the conflict escalated to full-scale warfare. The Bosnian
government faced three different groups fighting on behalf of the Croats, the unrecognized government of
the Croat Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a set of militias from Croatia referred to as “Croatian
irregulars” and the Croatian army itself. International pressure on Croatia forced Croatian President Franco
Tudjman to pull most of his troops out of Bosnia in late 1993, but Bosnia still engaged in conflict with the
other two parties. Finally, a peace agreement between the Bosnian government and the Croatian Republic was
signed on March 1, 1994, calling for a federal republic of Bosnia with power-sharing between the two groups.
Some clashes continued but implementation of the agreement began in May, 1994.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Croatia

Rebpolwing: does not apply

Croatia was an external state intervening in the Bosnian conflict and so was not participating in the domestic
political process.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 103,500
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reports that Croatia had 103,500 troops in Bosnia. The
Uppsala conflict database writes that 103,500 was the total number of troops that the Croatian army had but
that it is not clear how many troops were deployed in Bosnia. The size of the Croatian army was larger than
the Bosnian army, particularly when it is taken into account that the Bosnian government was also engaged in
a war with Bosnian Serbs.

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Croatian irregulars

Rebpolwing: no

The Croatian irregulars were militias from Croatia that intervened on behalf of the Croats in Bosnia. Each
militia had a political agenda, one in particular was seeking to restore the borders of Croatia from the fascist
Ustasha regime during World War II. However, the Croatian irregulars did not participate in the domestic
political process in Bosnia in any fashion.

Rebestimate: 16,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 45,000
Rebstrength: weaker

It is not at all unclear how many troops the Croatian irregulars had in Bosnia. The Uppsala conflict database
gives the range from 1,000 to 45,000 but reports that in January 2002 it appeared that 16,000 Croatian

344

irregulars were in Bosnia. The Croatian irregulars on their own were no match for the Bosnian national
government

Dyad: Bosnia and Herzegovina vs. Croatian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Croatian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina declared itself an autonomous region and established a
government. This government was not recognized as independent, however.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 50,000
Rebstrength: parity

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates the troop strength of the Croatian Republic
of Bosnia and Herzegovina at 50,000. This is a comparable force to the number of troops the Bosnian
government had deployed to the Croatian sphere of conflict in the republic.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

345

Conflict: India vs. Jharkand Mukti Morcha (conflict id: 3060)

Conflict Summary: The Jharkand Mukti Morcha is a political party in Bihar state of India that has pushed for
more autonomy for Bihar from the Indian national government. India had elections in 1993 and violence
heated up in Bihar around the elections.

Notes on Coding:

There is very little information available about this conflict.

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The Jharkand Mukti Morcha is a political party in Bihar state that is allowed to compete in elections there.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Agence France Press

346

Conflict: Russia vs. Parliamentary Forces (conflict id: 3070)

Conflict Summary: In late 1991, the Soviet Union was dissolved and Russia became an independent nation
again. In September 1993, Russian President Boris Yeltsin began pushing for constitutional reform that
would seriously reshift the executive-legislative power balance in favor of the executive. This push led to
conflict with some members of parliament. On September 23, 1993, the first clashes between forces loyal to
the parliamentarians and those loyal to Yeltsin occurred and on October 3 the violence reached a higher level
when supporters of the parliamentarians stormed the Moscow mayor’s office. Over a two day period armed
fighting took place between government forces and the supporters of the parliamentarians. The latter were
not well-organized, more like a mob of supporters than an organized fighting force, but numbers in the tens
of thousands. Despite these numbers they were no match for the government forces and on October 4 the
parliamentarians admitted defeat, many were arrested, and a process was put in place that led to the greater
consolidation of power under the executive.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The parliamentary forces were supporters were opposed to the reform program initiated by Russian president
Boris Yeltsin that would have increased the powers of the executive.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 40,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s Record of World Events in October 1993 wrote that the Financial Times reported that the
demonstrators on behalf of the parliamentarians numbered approximately 40,000.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

347

Conflict: Mexico vs. EZLN (conflict id: 3080)

Conflict Summary: A low-scale conflict broke out in Mexico on January 1, 1994 when the Zapatista National
Liberation Army (EZLN) seized four towns in the southern province of Chiapas. The Zapatistas made
demands on the behalf of the indigenous populations of Chiapas who had reaped little benefit from years of
economic development in Mexico. The EZLN timed the outbreak to coincide with the implementation of the
North American Free Trade Agreement. Clashes occurred between the Mexican government and the EZLN
and a string of peace talks between the actors began in February 1994. The conflict has continued at a very
low level of intensity with the EZLN shifting to more peaceful tactics of organization and protest. In 1996,
the EZLN and the Mexican government signed a general agreement on indigenous rights but the agreement
broke down after the EZLN accused the government of failing to fully implement it.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Although the EZLN was opposed to Mexico’s ruling Institutional Revolutionary Party, it was not directly
affiliated with any political party.

Rebestimate: 400
Rebestlow: 200
Rebesthigh: 600
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the EZLN had between 200 and 600 troops. It is clear that the
EZLN was not a match for the Mexican army.

Centcont: yes
Strengthcent: high

The EZLN is led by Subcommander Marcos, an elusive figure who always appears in public in a ski mask and
whose identity is not definitively known. The leadership exercises strong control over the organization.

Mobcap: moderate

Since its initial military success, the EZLN has focused on mobilizing the population in Chiapas to push for
greater rights for indigenous peoples there.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

348

Conflict: Russia vs. Republic of Chechnya (conflict id: 3090)

Conflict Summary: The Republic of Chechnya was an Autonomous Republic in the Republic of Russia when
the Soviet Union was still in existence. When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the Russian government
under Boris Yeltsin considered Chechnya a state within Russia. On the other hand, the President of
Chechnya, Dzochar Dudayev, declared Chechnya independent and seized key government buildings, killing
state representatives in Grozny, the capital of Chechnya. Despite the differences between the Russian and
Chechnyan governments there was little armed conflict until 1994 when Yeltsin decided to abandon a policy
of supporting internal Chechnyan dissidents and deployed the Russian army to the province. Fighting raged
on a heavy scale for the next two years until Dudayev’s death in May 1996 prompted the two sides to initiate
negotiations. A comprehensive cease fire was signed in August 1996 and the conflict was dormant until 1999.
In August 1999 fighters from Chechnya infiltrated into the neighboring province of Dagestan and declared
independence there (see conflict id 3240). The Russian army launched attacks against Chechnya again with
the aim of ending the de-facto independence of the province. Since then the Russian army has generally had
the upper hand but the conflict has been very destructive, producing huge numbers of casualties and
refugees.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The government of the Republic of Chechnya was what initially declared independence in 1991 and was a
legal government within the Russian federation.

Rebestimate: 15,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 25,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute annual yearbooks report the following numbers of
troops for the Republic of Chechnya across the conflict. In 1995, the range is 12,000-20,000. In 1996, the
range is 5,000-10,000. In 1999, 2000 and 2001 the range is 8,000-25,000. The estimate here is listed as 15,000
since that is right around the middle of the range identified for most years. SIPRI identifies the Russian army
as possessing 1.5 million troops, clearly considerably stronger than the Chechen forces.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

349

Conflict: Yemen-Democratic Republic of Yemen (conflict id: 3100)

Conflict Summary: North and South Yemen were two separate states during the colonial and Cold War
period that were merged in 1990 to form one state of Yemen. Even after the merger, however, both North
and South Yemen maintained a separate military. In late 1993 a political crisis emerged over a dispute
between the President of Yemen, who was from the north, and the Vice President, who was from the south.
The conflict escalated through political assassinations until in April 1994 the two armies clashed with each
other. The southern Yemenese politicians seceded and declared an independent Democratic Republic of
Yemen in what had been South Yemen, but the southern army was soundly defeated by the north in July
1994.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The leadership of the independent Democratic Republic of Yemen was made up of former members of the
Yemenese national government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 27,500
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the Democratic Republic of Yemen had 27,500 troops. The
forces fighting on behalf of South Yemen were clearly weaker than those fighting for north Yemen.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

350

Conflict: Pakistan-MQM (conflict id: 3120)

Conflict Summary: The Mohajir are a population of Urdu-speakers in Pakistan that migrated from India at
the time of the partition of India and Pakistan. The Mohajir People Movement (MQM) emerged in 1986 and
began challenging the state to recognize Mohajir rights and to allow for greater participation of Mohajir in the
government. Some violence occurred over the next nine years but the conflict reached a new level of intensity
in 1985, and the Pakistani army was deployed to Karachi. The army was able to deal a serious blow to the
militants, and the next year they decided to pursue a peaceful strategy instead of a violent one. In 1997, the
MQM participated in national elections.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The MQM was created with the intention of gaining more rights and political access for the Mohajir. In
elections in 1997, the MQM competed freely and did quite well.

Rebestimate, rebesthigh, rebestlow: 160
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that in February 1995 the MQM was estimated to have 160 troops. It
is clear that the group, while able to mobilize a good number of people to participate in protests/riots, was no
match for the Pakistani army and they were decisively defeated when the army intervened in Karachi in 1985.

Centcontrol: yes
Strengthcent: low

As a political party, the MQM did have a central leadership. However, the Uppsala Conflict Database reports
that the movement experienced fractionalization throughout the 1990s.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

351

Conflict: Ethiopia-Al-Itahad al-Islami (conflict id 3140)

Conflict Summary: The Ogaden region of Ethiopia has long been an area of contention. The majority Somali
region was the cite of an interstate war with Somalia in the 1970s and internal rebel groups have battled for
separation from Ethiopia and unification with Somalia for a long time. In 1996, a new group emerged fighting
for Ogaden separatism, Al-Itahad al-Islami (the Islamic Union). That group was based largely out of Somalia
and in the late 1990s, Ethiopia attacked their bases in Somalia, severely limiting their fighting ability. They still
exist at present and have ties to international Islamist organizations such as Al-Qaeda.

Notes on Coding

Very little information is available about Al-Itahad al-Islami.

Rebpolwing: no

Al-Itahad al-Islami does not have a political wing.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 2,000

The Federation of American Scientists reports that Al-Itahad al-Islami has 2,000 members. It is not clear how
they obtained that estimate.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Federation of American Scientists report (http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ogadin.htm,
accessed March 2, 2004).

352

Conflict: Niger vs. FARS and FDR (conflict id: 3150)

Conflict Summary: In 1995, as the government of Niger was completing a peace accord with multiple
organizations demanding greater autonomy for the Tourag (see conflict id. 2800), it faced an uprising from a
new source: the Democratic Front for Renewal (FDR), a group which organized ethnic groups to demand
greater autonomy in eastern Niger. Over the next two years violent clashes occurred between the government
and the FDR until the signing of a peace agreement on August 22, 1998. In the meantime another group, the
Revolutionary Armed Forces of the Sahara (FARS) emerged in 1997 made up of Arab and Toubou militants
and engaged in violent clashes with the government. That conflict was resolved on November 29, 1997, when
the two groups signed a peace accord.

Notes on Coding

There is very little information available about this conflict and indeed it appears that little is known about
these two groups. It is clear that both had fairly centralized leadership and at least enough of a fighting
capacity to force the government of Niger to make some concessions. Beyond that there is little information
about the number of troops each group possessed or the fighting capacity of the rebels.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

353

Conflict: Comoros-MPA (conflict id: 3160)

Conflict Summary: In 1997 dissatisfaction with the Comoros central government led an organized protest
movement on the island of Anjouan to call for greater autonomy up to independence and recolonization by
France. On August 3, 1997, the leader of the Anjounaise Popular Movement (MPA), Abdallah Ibrahim
unilaterally declared the independence of the island. On September 3, the government of Comoros
dispatched 200-300 troops to defeat the secessionists where they were soundly defeated. Since then no
fighting has taken place and negotiations have continued between the government and the separatists.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: explicit link
rebpolwinglegal: unclear

The rebel MPA has formed a government on the secessionist island of Anjouan but prior to doing so was not
a participant in politics in the Comoros government.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: unclear
Rebstrength: stronger

None of the sources provided any reference to the number of troops supporting the MPA. However, it is
clear that the support was too much for the government to defeat the secessionists militarily.

New end date: 9/16/1997

On September 16, 1997, a military leader in Comoros reported that the government would make no more
attempts to retake the island militarily, ending the armed conflict.

Sources:

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

354

Conflict: Congo-Brazzaville vs. FDU and Angola and Congo-Brazaville/Angola/Chad vs. Cobras, Cocoyes,
Ninjas, Ntisoulous (conflict id 3170)

Conflict Summary: Allegations of fraud in the 1993 political elections led to the outbreak of violence in
Congo as the three main political factions created militas and fighting broke out over who would control the
country. In 1994 a truce was negotiated between the three leaders and negotiations continued through 1996.
In 1997, fighting broke out again as one of the leaders, former president Denis Sassou-Nguesso and his
militia, the Cobras, began vying for power. In October 1997 Nguesso’s United Democratic Forces (FDU),
backed by thousands of troops from Angola took power in Brazzaville and the sitting president, Pascal
Lissouba and another leader of one of the 1993-1994 militias, Bernard Koleas, fled the country. Fighting
continued between the militias and in 1998 full-scale civil war erupted between the army (which was now
made up of many ex-Cobras) and militias supporting the exiled politicians—the Ninjas (supporters of Koleas)
and the Cocoyes (supporters of Lissoubu). In November and December 1999 the Cocoyes and Ninjas
reached an agreement to stop fighting and begin disarming, although one faction of the Ninjas, the
Ntsiloulous, continued battling the government. They were still fighting as of the end of 2002.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Congo-Brazzaville vs. FDU (1993-1994, 1997)

Rebpolwing: explicit link
Rebpolwinglegal: yes

The leader of the FDU, Denis Sassou-Nguesso, was a former president of Congo who had competed in
elections before. His battle against the government began because of allegations of election fraud in 1993.

Rebestimate: 2,250
Rebestlow: 1,500
Rebesthigh: 3,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that the FDU had between 1,500 and 3,000
troops in the Cobra militia that provided its military force. The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the
Congolese government had 10,000 troops in 1993 and 15,000 in 1997. However, it is not clear how many of
these troops were loyal to President Pascal Lissouba.

Dyad: Congo-Brazzaville vs. Angola (1997)

Rebpolwing, rebpolwinglegal: does not apply

Angola was an external state participant in the Congolese conflict and so did not have a political wing.

Rebestimate: 1,000
Rebestlow: 1,000
Rebesthigh: 3,500
Rebstrength: stronger

Both

Africa Confidential

and Keesing’s Record of World Events report that 1,000 Angolan troops backed up

Sassou-Nguesso. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that Angola had 3,500
troops in Congo. In either case, Angola was clearly militarily stronger than the Brazzaville government as it
has one of the largest and best equipped armies in the region.

Dyad: Congo-Brazzaville/Angola/Chad vs. Cocoyes

355

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Cocoyes were a militia organized by Bernard Koleas, who was prime minister at the time of Sassou-
Nguesso’s successful takeover of Brazzaville. They remained loosely affiliated with him, however, they
distanced themselves from him as they agreed to negotiate with the government and not to contest elections
in 2002 despite the fact that Koleas had been exiled and was barred from participating.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

This estimate is a very rough estimate of the number of troops, and almost certainly estimates too low. None
of the sources found made any reference to the number of Cocoye fighters there were. However,

Africa

Confidential

reported in August 2000 that 800 Cocoye fighters had been cornered and laid down their arms,

meaning that they had at least 800. In any case, the Cocoye were clearly weaker than the combined might of
the Republic of Congo and Angola, however, they had the fighting capacity to persist in the conflict for a
while.

Dyad: Congo-Brazzaville/Angola/Chad vs. Ninjas

Rebpolwing: acknowledged link
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The Ninjas were a militia organized by former President Pascal Lissoubu, They remained loosely affiliated
with him, however, they distanced themselves from him as they agreed to negotiate with the government and
not to contest elections in 2002 despite the fact that Lissoubu had been exiled and was barred from
participating.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimated that in 1998 the Ninjas had about 1,000 troops. This estimate is in
comparison to about 1,500-3,000 troops for the government, backed up by 2,500 troops from Angola and
some more from Chad.

Dyad: Congo-Brazzaville/Angola/Chad vs. Ntsiloulous

Rebpolwing: no

The Ntsiloulous were a branch of the Ninjas that split off and followed Pastor Ntoumi, who

Africa

Confidential

(June 2002) described as “a mystical-military cult leader.” Ntoumi had no apparent political

agenda.

Rebestimate: 1,750
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 3000
Rebstrength: weaker

Africa Confidential

reported in June 2002 that Ntoumi controlled up to 500 Ninja fighters, and that other

Ninjas not directly under his control were influenced by him. The Uppsala Conflict Databse estimated that in

356

2002 Ntsiloulous had between 2,000 and 3,000 troops. These estimates are in comparison to 10,000 troops
possessed by the government in 2002.

Sources:

•

Africa Confidential

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

357

Conflict: Guinea-Bissau/Senegal/Guinea-Military Faction (conflict id 3190)

Conflict Summary: On June 7, 1998, a faction of the Guinea-Bissau military led by General Ansumane Mane
seized the airport and a barracks on the outskirts of the capital. The rebellion broke out over anger about
potential prosecution of Mane for illegal arms transfers to separatist rebels in Senegal. Senegal and Guinea
very quickly deployed 2,000 troops (total) to Guinea-Bissau which allowed the government of Joao Bernardo
Vieira to stay in power. Despite a series of cease-fire agreements conflict continued over the next five months
until a peace agreement was signed at Abuja, Nigeria on November 1. As part of the peace agreement Guinea
and Senegal had to pull out of the country, to be replaced by an Economic Community of West African
States (ECOWAS) peacekeeping mission. In March 1999 the two countries did so and the ECOWAS mission
was deployed, but on May 7, 1999, the military junta violated the peace agreement and overthrew Vieira’s
government, thus ending the war. The peacekeeping mission was pulled out shortly thereafter.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The military officers were not affiliated with a political movement.

Rebestimate: 4,500
Rebestlow: 3,000
Rebesthigh: 6,000
Rebstrength: stronger

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that the military faction had between 3,000
and 6,000 troops. It is clear that if it had not been for Senegal and Guinea’s support of the government the
rebels would have achieved victory much sooner.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

358

Conflict: Lesotho-Military Faction (conflict id: 3200)

Conflict Summary: Violent protests which began in August 1998 in Maseru (the capital of Lesotho) over
allegations of electoral fraud in an election in May 1997 which had delivered 79 out of 80 seats in the
legislature to the ruling Lesotho Congress for Democracy (LCD) continued to escalate into September. On
September 11 order in Lesotho had deteriorated to the point where splits in the army started to emerge and a
number of junior officers joined the protesters and arrested some of their superiors leading to a crisis in the
military. As the situation got worse, on September 22, 600 South African troops entered Lesotho as part of a
South African Development Community (SADC) mission to restore order. The entering troops encountered
fiercer opposition than they were expecting but by a week later many of the rebels had surrendered and most
of the fighting had died down. At talks in Maseru on October 2, the LCD and opposition parties agreed to
hold fresh elections by March 2000.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

The protests in Lesotho were targeted against alleged election fraud. However, the military units rebelling
against the government were not allied with a particular political party.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,800

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports that 1,800 soldiers joined the rebellion against the government.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

359

Conflict: Yugoslavia vs. UCK and NATO (conflict id 3210)

Conflict Summary: Kosovo was an autonomous province of Serbia in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and
after the dissolution of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s remained a part of Serbia. The population of Kosovo
was 90% Albanian and there was strong support for greater autonomy of Kosovo from Serbia among the
Albanian populations. In the mid 1990s an insurgent group, the Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK), emerged
which began launching violent attacks against Serbian military and police installations in Kosovo. The first
major coordinated attack by the UCK occurred on April 22, 1996, and the conflict continued at a low level of
intensity in 1996 and 1997. As the conflict heated up through 1997 the UCK gained access to a large stock of
weapons from the collapsing Albanian army and in 1998 the conflict became a full-scale armed conflict. The
UCK made major gains until June of 1998 when a Serbian counter-offensive regained territory won by the
UCK and created a massive number of refugees and internally displaced persons. In talks at Rambouillet in
February and March 1999 the UCK and Serbian authorities agreed in principal to a peace-plan calling for
limited autonomy for Kosovo with a referendum in three years to decide the final status of the region, but the
deal broke down out of Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic’s unwillingness to allow a 28,000 person
NATO peacekeeping force to be deployed. In response to the breakdown of the peace talks, NATO began a
bombing campaign against Serbian targets in Kosovo and in Serbia proper in late March 1999. In June 1999,
Milosevic agreed to NATO demands including the withdrawal of Serbian troops from Kosovo and the
bombing campaign ended and a peacekeeping mission was deployed.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Yugoslavia-UCK

Rebpolwing: no

The UCK was primarily a force aimed at gaining the independence of Kosovo through violent means. There
was a more moderate Albanian political movement, however, that group lost in popularity in the years leading
up to the conflict as more Albanians became convinced that moderation would not work.

Rebestimate: 9,000
Rebestlow: 5,000
Rebesthigh: 30,000
Rebstrength: weaker

It is difficult to tell exactly how many troops the UCK had at their disposal. Keesing’s Record of World
Events reported in June 1999 that during the NATO bombing campaign the UCK launched an attack into
Kosovo from Albania with 5,000 troops. In September 1999, Keesing’s Record of World Events reported
that the UCK composed 9,000 troops at the end of the conflict. Prior to the conflict, the political
representative of the UCK reported that the group had 30,000 fighters. Regardless of the exact number of
troops it is clear that the UCK was not a military match for the Serbian army.

Mobcap: high

The population of Kosovo was 90% Albanian and the UCK had strong support from that civilian population.

Armsproc: moderate

The International Crisis Group reported in September 1998 that the UCK had gained in fighting strength by
obtaining a large number of weapons from the “disintegration in the spring of 1997 of the Albanian army.”

Dyad: Yugoslavia vs. NATO

360

Note: This conflict is listed as nineteen different dyads (Yugoslavia-Belgium, Yugoslavia-Canada, Yugoslavia-
Czech Republic, Yugoslavia-Denmark, Yugoslavia-France, Yugoslavia-Germany, Yugoslavia-Greece,
Yugoslavia-Hungary, Yugoslavia-Iceland, Yugoslavia-Italy, Yugoslavia-). However, each of these external
states on Side B was acting as part of a multilateral peacekeeping force so it does not make sense to treat
them as separate actors. Here they will all be treated the same.

Rebpolwing: does not apply

NATO (and its individual members) were involved in the former Yugoslavia in an attempt to force Serbia to
accept a peace deal. They did not, therefore, have a political wing.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: -9
Rebstrength: much stronger

The NATO military action against Serbia was all in the form of airstrikes, and so the number of troops does
not apply as it does in a conventional ground war. However, clearly, NATO was much stronger militarily than
Serbia.

Newstartdate: 3/25/1999

The NATO airstrikes against Serbia commenced on March 25, 1999.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

International Crisis Group Balkans Report No. 41, “Kosovo’s Long Hot Summer.” 2 September
1998.

•

International Crisis Group Balkans Report No. 69, “The New Kosovo Protectorate.” 20 June 1999.

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

361

Conflict: Ethiopia-OLF (conflict id: 3220)

Conflict Summary: The Oromo Liberation Front was formed in 1974 to push for the formation of an
independent state in the Oromo regions of southern and eastern Ethiopia. In 1989 the activities of the OLF
increased and they became linked with other ethnically based groups such as the Tigray People’s Liberation
Front (TPLF) and the Eritrean People’s Liberation Front in the attempt to overthrow Ethiopian president
Mengistu, which was successful in 1991. In July of 1991, the OLF joined with some other ethnically-based
rebel groups and participated in a transitional government, but pulled out of that government in 1992 over
dissatisfaction with TPLF dominance. There was some low-intensity conflict for the next seven years but the
fighting did not really heat up again until 1999 when the OLF decided to renew its full armed struggle against
the government.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: yes
Rebpolwinglegal: no

The OLF was a participant in the transitional government in 1991-1992. However, they pulled out since then
and do not compete in Ethiopian elections.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 7,000
Rebstrength: weaker

In 1990 and 1991 the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute reported that the OLF had 7,000
troops. None of the sources identified troop counts for the 1999-2001 phase of the conflict.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

362

Conflict: Russia-Republic of Dagestan (conflict id: 3230)

Conflict Summary: The brief conflict between Russia and the Republic of Dagestan in 1999 was in large part
the result of spillover from conflict with the separatist republic of Chechnya. Beginning on August 7, 1999,
rebels from Chechnya captured seven villages on the border between Chechnya and Dagestan and on August
10 declared an independent Islamic state of Dagestan. The rebels were primarily Chechen and were led by
Chechen commanders. On August 12 Russian forces began to retaliate and within two weeks the rebellion
had largely died out and the Chechen commanders had returned to Chechnya.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

Sources revealed no relationship between the Dagestani rebels and any political movement.

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

Keesing’s contemporary archives says that the “rebels numbered over 1,000.” There was no way that this
force could defeat the Russian government militarily.

Mobcap: low

The Chechen and Dagestani rebels that declared the independent state of Dagestan follow the Wahhabi
brand of Islam which is not the religion of the majority of Dagestanis. Additionally, unlike Chechnya,
Dagestan is very ethnically diverse, and so the rebel group would have a very difficult time rallying much
popular support to its cause.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

363

Conflict: Uzbekistan/Kyrgyzstan-Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) (conflict id 3240)

Conflict Summary: The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) is an armed Islamist movement striving to
establish a state based on Islamic law in that country. Many of the fighters in the IMU participated in the civil
war in Tajikistan and were based in Afghanistan when it was controlled by the Taliban. Beginning in 1999, the
IMU engaged in a series of car bombings and hostage takings targeting against the Uzbek government. They
also had bases in Kyrgyzstan. In 2001, the leader of the IMU Djuma Namagani was killed in fighting with the
Northern Alliance in Afghanistan.

Notes on Coding

Rebpolwing: no

There are a number of legal Islamist parties in Uzbekistan however it does not appear that the IMU had
direct links with them.

Rebestimate: 700
Rebestlow: 500
Rebesthigh: 1,000
Rebstrength: weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database reports that the MIU possessed less than 1,000 troops. The above numbers,
then, are just estimates. However, it is clear that their fighting capacity was limited to being able to perform
acts of terrorism against the government rather than having a significant ability to wage war.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Contemporary Archives

•

International Crisis Group Asia Report No. 21, Central Asia: Uzbekistan at Ten – Repression and
Instability. August 21, 2001.

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

364

Conflict: Central African Republic (conflict id 3250)

Conflict Summary: On May 28, 2001, a military faction, probably led by former President André Kolingba,
attempted a coup against Central African Republic (CAR) President Ange-Felix Patassé. The attempt failed
and several days of fighting followed in the capital, Bangui, but by June 7 government forces, supported by
Libyan soldiers, had regained full control. On October 26, Patassé dismissed then armed forces chief of
general staff General Francois Bozize. Following a several day standoff, Bozize fled to Chad. In August 2002,
22 people were killed in fighting along the Chad-CAR border between forces loyal to Bozize and government
forces. In October 2002 Bozize and his forces seized large parts of Bangui before they were repelled by a
coalition of the CAR and Libyan armies and soldiers from Jean Pierre Bemba’s Congolese Liberation Front
(FLC)—a rebel group in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Finally, on March 15, 2003, Bozize, backed
by about 1000 soldiers, took control of the capital, dissolved the government, and declared himself President.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Central African Republic-Military Faction
rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 600
rebstrength: weaker

No clear estimation of number of troops involved at the time of the coup. However, at least 552 soldiers
were convicted (either in presence or in absentia) for their participation in the coup, so the estimate for their
troop strength is 600. The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the government had 4,150 troops in this
period.

Dyad: Central African Republic-Forces of Francois Bozize
rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 1000
rebstrength: weaker
When Bozize successfully took Bangui, he had 1000 troops with him. The Uppsala Conflict Database
estimates that in 2002, the Central African Republican army had 3,500 troops and in 2003 it had 2,550

Sources:

•

Africa Confidential

(Vol 42, No. 12, Vol 43. No. 19, Vol. 43, No. 24)

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events reports, May 2001, June 2001, November 2001, December 2001,
August 2002, October 2002, March 2003).

•

Uppsala Conflict Database

365

Conflict: Macedonia (conflict id 3260)

Conflict Summary: On January 22, 2001 members of the self-proclaimed “National Liberation Army” (NLA)
attacked a police station in Tearce in northwestern Macedonia near the border with Kosovo. The group was
upset over discriminatory governmental policies against Macedonia’s minority Albanian population,
particularly in the areas of education, citizenship, ownership, language and representative government. Over
the next several months further clashes between governmental officials and the NLA continued, reaching
their peak in March 2001 in the city of Tetovo, Macedonia’s second largest city and the center of Albanian
political activity in the country. In late March the governmental launched an offensive against the rebels and
by the end of the month the violence had largely died down.

Notes on Coding

Polwing: alleged link
Polwinglegal: legal

Around the time the NLA launched its violent uprising, a new political party, the National Democratic Party
(NDP) emerged with a platform that sought to capture the dissatisfaction with the plight of Albanians in
Macedonia. They have denied links with the KLA. The NDP is legal.

Rebestimate: 1150
Rebestlow: 300
Rebesthigh: 2000
Rebstrength: low

At the time of the outbreak, the KLA claimed to be 2000 strong and growing. The government claimed that
the rebels only amounted to a few hundred.

Source: International Crisis Group Balkans Report 109: “The Macedonian Question: Reform or Rebellion”

366

Conflict USA et al. vs. Al Qaida (conflict id 3270)

Conflict Summary: On September 11, 2001, four airlines were hijacked in the United States. Two of the
airlines were flown into the twin towers of the World trade Center, both of which collapsed, another plane
was flown into the Pentagon and the fourth crashed in Pennsylvania. In all, somewhere close to 4,000 people
were killed. Investigations after the September 11 attacks revealed that the group responsible was almost
certainly Al Qaida, an Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organization led by Osama Bin Laden that had also
been responsible for bombings of the United States embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi,
Kenya, as well as other terrorist attacks. In the months following the bombings, the United States
government declared a “War on Terror” and with a coalition of other nations began providing strong support
to groups in Afghanistan opposed to that country’s Taliban government, which the United States alleged was
harboring Al Qaida. In 2002 the coalition forces overthrew the Taliban and a new coalition government was
imposed.

Notes on Coding

This case is one of a terrorist attack and then the retaliation and so does not really fit many of the variables.

Rebpolwing: no

Although Al Qaida clearly had a political agenda, in no way did it try to influence domestic politics in the
United States.

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker
None of the sources identified made any reference to the number of troops possessed by Al Qaida. It was
clear, however, that Al Qaida is completely dwarfed militarily by the United States, its main strength is the
ability to carry out terrorist attacks.

Sources:

•

Keesing’s Record of World Events

•

Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbooks

367

Conflict: Cote D’Ivoire (conflict id 3280)

Conflict Summary: On September 19, 2002, members of the Ivorian armed forces attempted a coup d’etat
which failed. It quickly developed into a civil war, however, with the Patriotic Movement of Ivory Coast
(MPCI) seizing large areas of territory in the northern and central part of the country. The imposition of a
700-person French force enforced an October 17, 2002 ceasefire but both the government and the MPCI
continued a massive recruitment effort to expand their fighting capacity. On November 28, 2002, two
additional rebel groups, the Ivorian Popular Movement of the Great West (MPIGO) and the Movement for
Justice and Peace (MJP) emerged in the West of the country, with heavy support from Liberian president
Charles Taylor and involving Liberian and Sierra Leonean troops along with their Ivorian components. In
January 2003, a peace deal was reached between the government, rebel groups, and unarmed opposition
parties but implementation was slow. A United Nations chapter-seven force was deployed in 2003 and by the
fall of the year organized fighting had largely ceased but the ceasefire was precarious.

Notes on Coding

Dyad: Cote D’Ivoire vs. MPCI
Rebpolwing: Formal link
Legal: yes

While the MPCI did not start out as a political movement, as part of the peace deal signed in January 2003,
the group received miniasterial positions in the Ivorian government. Since the conflict has ended the various
rebel groups have allied into one group the “Forces Nouvelles” who may compete in elections in 2005 as a
unified political party.

rebestimate: 8,500
rebestlow: 7,000
rebesthigh: 10,000
rebstrength: parity

In November 2003, the International Crisis Group reported that “The total of (MPCI) recruits is difficult to
ascertain. Some sources cite 3,000 to 5,000, with overall forces numbering between 7,000 and 10,000
including some 1,000

dozo

fighters” (p. 14). The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the army of Cote

D’Ivoire had slightly more than 17,000 troops.

Armsproc: moderate

The International Crisis Group reported in November 2003 that Burkina Faso had helped the MPCI to
assemble an impressive arsenal.

Dyad: Cote D’Ivoire vs. MJP

Rebestimate, rebestlow, rebesthigh: 300
Rebstrength: much weaker

The Uppsala Conflict Database estimates that the MJP had 300 troops in Cote D’Ivoire. This was a much
smaller force than the 17,050 troops possessed by the Ivorian army.

Dyad: Cote D’Ivoire vs. MPIGO

Rebestimate: unclear
Rebstrength: much weaker