Introduction
Political violence is a difficult term to define. The main question that arises is “when is violence considered political?” Before we can answer that, we first must define the concept of violence. Kalyvas (2006) states that “[a]t the basic level, violence is the deliberate infliction of harm on people”. Although some scholars have rightly considered non-physical aspects, such as social or economic oppression, as a form of oppression (i.e., “structural” violence), we will primarily focus on the physical variety in this chapter. So while harm can come in many types, political violence exclusively focuses on physical violence. Physical violence includes the use of physical force to exert power. Examples include the use of weapons by criminal gangs to mark their territory, kidnappings, mass shootings, and torture. And while many of these examples can also be considered as political violence, the simple act of violence itself does not make it political. There is another step that makes violence become political.
Political violence occurs when the use of physical harm is motivated by political intentions. For example, when violence is used to destroy a social order, but also to preserve a social order, we can consider this political violence. Thus, political violence can be used by those seeking to challenge the socio-political status quo. And it could involve those who want to defend that same status quo.
Differentiating when an act of violence is simply criminal, or should be considered political violence can be tricky. For example, many scholars contend that the actions taken by the drug cartels in the Gulf of Mexico should be described as political violence. The cartels often target law enforcement, kidnap the loved ones of government officials and threaten the government itself. Thus, by targeting the official capacity of the government, some say that the Mexican drug trafficking groups are politically violent. However, we have to ask what are the intentions of these narco groups? Their primary interests are financial; the continued flow of narcotics from Central and South America to the U.S. border. They are overwhelmingly not interested in challenging the socio-political order. They have little interest in regime change, or in elections. The drug cartels tend to get involved only when their interests are threatened. As long as the Mexican government stays out of their way, they will respond in kind.
What are some forms of political violence? Are interstate wars, or wars between two or more countries, considered political violence? The answer generally is no. Even though our definition above does not necessarily preclude international wars, the vast majority of political violence transpires within a state. Intrastate political violence is defined as political violence that wholly or largely occurs within a state or country. While individuals are being subjugated to political violence in the context of an international war, such a war still is a contestation between two or more sovereign entities where individuals are “participating” as a member of a sovereign state (see the definition and more details on state in chapter XX). So we need to think about who is using violence against who when we are trying to classify different forms of political violence. Generally speaking, at least one of the parties involved in a case of political violence is a non-state actor. A non-state actor is any political actor that is not associated with a government. It is further defined as “an individual or organization that has significant political influence but is not allied to any particular country or state” (Lexico, n.d.).
Non-state actors include a wide range of organizations and individuals. Many non-state actors are charities, or have peaceful intentions. This includes non-governmental organizations, multinational corporations, and trade unions. They can also include individual political actors as well (a deeper discussion of non-state actors occurs in Chapter 12). Non-state actors that engage in political violence traditionally involve insurgents, guerilla groups and terrorists. Each one of the groups will be discussed at length in this chapter. Finally, political violence can include a wide range of activities: terrorism, assassinations, coups, battles, riots, explosions, and protests.
A more difficult differentiation occurs when non-state actors have a transnational presence. Transnationalism is defined as “events, activities, ideas, trends, processes and phenomena that appear across national boundaries and cultural regions” (Juergensmeyer, 2013). Thus, transnational political violence is defined as political violence that occurs across different countries or crosses state borders. By their nature, insurgents and guerilla groups tend not to be transnational, as their focus is on overthrowing a government within a specific country, or succeeding in the secession of a region or province. Secession is defined as the act of formal withdrawal or separation from a political entity, usually a state. The goals of secessionist movements are often the creation of a new state, or leaving to join another state.
This is not the case with terrorism, however. Since the 1990s, terrorism has become transnational, with the rise of groups such as al-Qaeda and their affiliates and offsprings. Transnational actors blur the line between comparative politics and international relations. As countries have allied to combat transnational terrorist activity, their responses could be understood through international relations theory. In addition, international governmental organizations, such as the United Nations have also worked with individual member-states on counterterrorism strategies. Still, terrorism is often researched by comparative scholars as the targets of their political violence are civilians. Given that these attacks happen within a country, comparative methodology can help in analyzing and/or assessing terrorist acts and their responses.
Given the above discussion, we can present several categories of political violence. The first category involves state-sponsored political violence. This form of political violence occurs when a government uses violence, either against its own citizens, referred to as internal sponsored political violence; or against foreign citizens, usually in neighboring countries, referred to as external sponsored political violence. The second category involves non-state sponsored political violence. Forms of non-state sponsored political violence involves insurgencies, civil wars, revolutions, and terrorism. Each one of these categories, both state-sponsored and non-state sponsored forms will be discussed at length below.
