Local Partners for Local Problems: What Forms of Military Intervention Build Civilian Support?

63 Pages Posted: 28 Jun 2019 Last revised: 15 Nov 2019

See all articles by Austin Knuppe

Austin Knuppe

Dickey Center for International Understanding, Dartmouth College

Date Written: November 14, 2019

Abstract

Under what conditions do intervention tactics shape civilian support for foreign intervention in fragile states? Critics of U.S. foreign intervention often observe that invasive tactics—such as reliance on offshore air power or the deployment of foreign ground troops—undermine local support by triggering nationalist resistance and fear of indiscriminate violence. In contrast, I argue that civilians prefer more invasive forms of intervention when foreign patrons assist local combatants from a common ingroup. I test the theory on original survey data collected in Baghdad, Iraq, in November 2017. Respondents preferred more invasive tactics when foreign patrons assisted the Iraqi Security Forces and pro-government militias, and less invasive support for outgroup combatants like the Kurdish Peshmerga. These findings suggest that many publicized examples of intervention failure can be attributed to a lack of attention to the legitimacy of local partners, as opposed to the identity or tactics of foreign interveners.

Keywords: Iraq, counterinsurgency, military intervention, ISIS, survey experiments

Suggested Citation

Knuppe, Austin, Local Partners for Local Problems: What Forms of Military Intervention Build Civilian Support? (November 14, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3410558 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3410558

Austin Knuppe (Contact Author)

Dickey Center for International Understanding, Dartmouth College ( email )

6048 N Main St
Hanover, NH 03755
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
13
Abstract Views
119
PlumX Metrics