By
Rania Maroun 500319319
Submitted
To
Dr. Abbas H. Gnamo
Ted Rogers School of Business Management
In partial fulfillment for the requirements
For
POL 540
November 7, 2011
Ryerson University
As a Lebanese citizen I have experienced firsthand the tragic result which intrastate violence leaves on a nation and its people. Intrastate conflicts have been the cause of the world’s many high profile displays of brutal and inhumane violent acts. In fact “most wars today take place within rather than between states” (Turton, 1997). From Somalia to Indonesia, intrastate conflicts are “particularly destructive of the lives and livelihoods of civilians, waged not against an invisible enemy but against neighbours, friends and even relatives” (Turton, 1997). Aside from the direct destruction of intrastate conflicts which have left up to 30 million people dead internationally since 1945 (Miall, Ramsbottom, Woodhouse, 1999), the long-term effects of these conflicts can be felt for generations. That is why understanding the reasons and how intrastate conflicts come about is essential to combating and eliminating their destructive results. Although some would argue that to understand intrastate conflicts, one must find common the common denominator, which would make them easier to identify and solve; is there really an underlying common denominator? Or the obvious reality is that interstate conflicts are context specific and completely vary in each incident, hence eliminating the concept of the common denominator for the reason of conflict.
Moreover, looking and analyzing what many have said are the common natures of intrastate conflicts - colonial legacy, unstable political structure, external interests, and ethnic hatred, one will get a further understanding that intrastate conflicts are in their own right context specific. First of all, to argue that common factors are a possible are false because they may or may not be present. Also these