Abstract

Abstract A primary goal of arms embargoes is to mitigate the humanitarian effects of conflict within target states by restricting access to foreign weaponry. Within this study, we investigate how embargoed governments adapt their violent strategies in response to restrictions on arms imports. We theorize that arms embargoes that undermine governments’ military strength may inadvertently increase their reliance on civilian repression as an alternative approach to countering domestic threats. However, we expect that targeted governments’ ability to acquire weapons from non-participating or non-compliant suppliers will have a mitigating effect. A global examination of the effects of arms embargoes between 1989 and 2004 supports our argument and also suggests that both the levels of arms received and who supplies them matter. Our findings suggest that policymakers who employ arms embargoes should consider increased violence against civilians as a potential unintended consequence and closely monitor target governments’ use of repression.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call