Unraveling proxy wars: A comparison of state sponsorship decisions in Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen

This study aims to explain the pattern of state sponsorship of civil wars in Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen. Recent studies have improved our scholarly understanding of decisions regarding intervention and sponsorship. Yet, our understanding of state sponsorship decision in conflict that precedes an escalation remains limited. Herein, I develop a multicausal framework to analyze state sponsorship decisions, employing fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to account for state support. The results suggest novel insights into how strategic interests drive states to influence civil war dynamics for desired benefits. Contrary to conventional wisdom, bilateral rivalry alone does not guarantee a sponsorship decision. States tend to support when they perceive opportunities that are aligned with their economic interests or when countering transnational threats from violent non-state actors who are backed by another state. These findings elucidate how initial state sponsorship decisions might relate to conflict escalation over time.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Interactions
Published
2024-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/03050629.2024.2421502
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.46

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unraveling proxy wars: A comparison of state sponsorship decisions in Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen

Natalia Tellidou
2 citations
International Interactions
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
4.46
article

Unraveling proxy wars: A comparison of state sponsorship decisions in Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen

Natalia Tellidou
article en
2 citations

Abstract

This study aims to explain the pattern of state sponsorship of civil wars in Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen. Recent studies have improved our scholarly understanding of decisions regarding intervention and sponsorship. Yet, our understanding of state sponsorship decision in conflict that precedes an escalation remains limited. Herein, I develop a multicausal framework to analyze state sponsorship decisions, employing fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis to account for state support. The results suggest novel insights into how strategic interests drive states to influence civil war dynamics for desired benefits. Contrary to conventional wisdom, bilateral rivalry alone does not guarantee a sponsorship decision. States tend to support when they perceive opportunities that are aligned with their economic interests or when countering transnational threats from violent non-state actors who are backed by another state. These findings elucidate how initial state sponsorship decisions might relate to conflict escalation over time.

International InteractionsVol. 50(6)
European University Institute
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
4.46
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.