The Critical Barrier To Civil War Summary

Walter in “The Critical Barrier to Civil War Settlement” tries to explain why civil wars are never ended with a peaceful settlement and fought until one side beats the other. This is because there are problems of enforcement and vulnerability; both sides prefer to fight instead of cooperate because it leaves them vulnerable (Walter compares this exchange with the Prisoner’s Dilemma situation). Unlike interstate wars, making cheating not favorable is difficult; either side cannot withhold resources or build military defenses without triggering a response from the other side and there is no neutral force or government to enforce peace. According to Walter, there are two ways to solve this issue: design power-sharing institutions involving both …show more content…
A country will go to civil war when the dissenting group believes using violence will get wanted outcomes when any sort of settlement cannot There is potential for intervention to prevent conflict in weak and strong states according to Cunningham. If external help to the government is expected, it will make the costs way more than the probability of victory for rebels, causing the probability for rebels to win to approach 0. The corner solution of the interaction is reached by interventions on behalf of government. US military focus because empirically much more common to help government. Governments who expect help can be more repressive and put in more effort than if they did not expect help. Different expectations about intervention can lead to conflict because one could be overoptimistic and reject compromise. In the US, some interventions that are long running were considered unsuccessful and unpopular, but if quick, public opinion becomes more favorable (an example of the halo effect). Providing support to government with good relations with population is less likely to lead to bad