MWI sits down with Dr. Benedetta Berti, researcher, author, and TED speaker to discuss the rise of violent non-state actors and how security professionals should understand them.
Dr. Benedetta Berti is a foreign policy and security researcher, analyst, consultant, author and lecturer. Her work focuses on human security and internal conflicts, as well as on post-conflict stabilization. Dr. Berti is the author of three books, including Armed Political Organizations: From Conflict to Integration. Her work and research have appeared, among others, in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, and Al-Jazeera as well as in academic journals including Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, Democratization the Middle East Journal, ORBIS and Mediterranean Politics.
Brilliant insights from Dr. Berti!
For a few articles related to this subject, see also:
http://www.usafa.edu/df/inss/OCP/ocp57.pdf
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/usafa/modeling_vnsa.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20080306112845/http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/dec02/terrorism2.asp
https://www.odi.org/publications/6662-humanitarian-negotiations-non-state-armed-militia-rebel
http://web.archive.org/web/20090301023230/http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2004/mar/casebeerMar04.pdf
Dr. Berti’s discussion about non-state violent actors is very interesting and filled with expert insights, but I didn’t hear much about “what makes these actors tick”. I think it’s vitally important to acknowledge and emphasize that there are two “brands” of non-state violent actors: Economically motivated individuals and groups versus politically/religiously motivated individuals and groups. The former (robbers, bandits, the various Mafia, the Tong, the Yakuza, drug lords, etc.) do not want to overthrow anything, but rather—as with most parasites—they have a vested interest in keeping the host alive. The latter (the Zealots, Jihadists, Irgun, Mau-Mau, Viet Cong, etc.) are primarily concerned with overturning an established political/social order and are most often motivated by religious or quasi-religious beliefs. We can live with irritating dandruff indefinitely, but we can’t live with an aggressive cancer. If we don’t kill the dandruff we flake. If we don’t kill the cancer we die.