Escalation Of Violent Conflicts Research Articles

Unveiling the climate–conflict nexus: Examining the influence of weather extremes on conflict emergence in the Philippine Bangsamoro

Extreme weather events have been closely associated with the escalation of violent conflicts. This article introduces empirical evidence that underscores the vulnerability of conflict emergence to extended deficit rainfall values within Maguindanao, a province situated in the Bangsamoro region of the southern Philippines. Using a combination of satellite data, hydrological analysis and an examination of conflict databases, our study unveils the pivotal role played by protracted droughts and intensified precipitation in fostering human insecurity, consequently elevating the likelihood of violent conflicts. Our research spotlights the climate–conflict nexus within this relatively less-explored geographical area. Our findings underscore a robust association between instances of violent conflicts, protracted deficits or episodes of intense rainfall, and the subsequent surge in food prices. Notably, disruptions in food prices align temporally with heightened participation in violent conflicts by individuals. In essence, the emergence of violent conflicts exacerbates fragility, thereby engendering a vicious cycle that intertwines climate change, conflict dynamics and the pursuit of peace.

Education in emergencies: challenges of providing education for Rohingya children living in refugee camps in Bangladesh

ABSTRACT The Rohingya is a stateless minority group in Myanmar, suffering from ethnic and religious armed conflicts, state persecution, and displacement. Since the escalation of violent conflicts in the early 2010s, they have fled the country and sought refuge in neighbouring countries, and in the biggest numbers, in Bangladesh. Living in densely populated refugee camps, Rohingya children receive very limited access to education and are exceptionally vulnerable to illnesses, violence and trafficking. This discussion paper describes the conditions and contexts under which education is offered, and identifies the serious problems and gaps in provision for Rohingya children in Bangladeshi refugee camps.

The United States and Russian Governments Involvement in the Syrian Crisis and the United Nations’ Kofi Annan Peace Process

The inability of the Syrian government to internally manage the popular uprising in the country have increased international pressure on Syria as well as deepen international efforts to resolve the crisis that has developed into a full scale civil war. It was the need to end the violent conflict in Syria that informed the appointment of Kofi Annan as the U.N-Arab League Special Envoy to Syria on February 23, 2012. This study investigates the U.S and Russian governments’ involvement in the Syrian crisis and the UN Kofi Annan peace process. The two persons’ Zero-sum model of the game theory is used as our framework of analysis. Our findings showed that the divergence on financial and military support by the U.S and Russian governments to the rival parties in the Syrian conflict contradicted the mandate of the U.N Security Council that sanctioned the Annan plan and compromised the ceasefire agreement contained in the plan which resulted in the escalation of violent conflict in Syria during the period the peace deal was supposed to be in effect. The implication of the study is that the success of any U.N brokered peace deal is highly dependent on the ability of its key members to have a consensus, hence, there is need to galvanize a comprehensive international consensus on how to tackle the Syrian crisis that would accommodate all crucial international actors. We recommended that there is need for a negotiated solution that will involve a compromise agreement by the conflicting parties on the basis of mutual consent since the zero-sum nature of the Syrian conflict in which both regime and its opponents seek total victory make political settlement elusive. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n27p1154

Words of Violence: “Fear Speech,” or How Violent Conflict Escalation Relates to the Freedom of Expression

The limits of the freedom of expression are a perennial discussion in human rights discourse. This article focuses on identifying yardsticks to establish the boundaries of freedom of expression in cases where violence is a risk. It does so by using insights from the social sciences on the escalation of violent conflict. By emphasizing the interaction between violence and discourse, and its effect on antagonisms between groups, it offers an interdisciplinary perspective on an ongoing legal debate. It introduces the notion of “fear speech” and argues that it may be much more salient in this context than hate speech.