Fathom Logo

Learning PlanSessionsContributors
 Insurgencies and the Role of Refugees: Focus on Afghanistan and the Taliban
 Fathom
Sessions
Session 2
Session 1Session 3

Forms of Support for Insurgencies

Untitled Document
State support or sponsorship ofan insurgency as an instrument of foreign policy was common during the ColdWar. The United States used the Nicaraguan contras, the Afghan mujahedin,Tibetan Buddhist fighters, and other insurgent movements as part of itspolicy to contain (and occasionally roll back) communism. Washington wasnot alone: The Soviet Union and China backed communist guerrillas in Angola,Greece, South Africa, Vietnam, and other parts of the world to further theirinfluence. Regional powers also recognized the utility of insurgencies.Countries as diverse as Israel, Iran, South Africa, Pakistan, Sudan, andEthiopia were among those that supported insurgencies to promote their localinterests.

The end of the Cold War, however, did not end state support for insurgents. Russia supported clients in several former republics of the Soviet Union, enabling them to gain autonomy and sometimes take power. In Africa, Rwanda and Uganda both assisted rebels who overthrew the Mobutu regime in Zaire. Currently, almost all of the Congo's neighbors actively assist one faction or another enmeshed in the country's civil war. Although the United States no longer arms anticommunist insurgents, it has provided aid to anti-Baath groups in Iraq and has at times considered providing direct assistance to groups as diverse as Bosnian Muslims, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), Iranian opposition movements, and Christian and animist Sudanese fighters.

Of the 74 insurgencies active since 1991 that were surveyed, 44 received state support that, in our judgment, was significant or critical to the survival and success of the movement (several other insurgencies received state support that was of limited consequence). Other outside supporters were also active: 21 movements received significant support from refugees, 19 received significant support from diasporas, and 25 gained backing from other outside actors, such as Islamic organizations or relief agencies.

State support, accordingly, remains an important source of strength for many insurgencies in the post-Cold War world. Outside government assistance helps insurgents improve their military power, recruiting base, diplomatic leverage, and other ingredients to success. Reflecting this, many of the insurgencies that have achieved the most impressive objectives, or remained operationally effective for extended periods of time--for example, the African National Congress (ANC), the Lebanese Hezbollah, the forces of Laurent Kabila in Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), the pro-Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) Tajiks, the Abkhaz, Transnistrians, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), the Nicaraguan resistance, and the Taliban--have all received a large measure of state assistance. In several instances, the insurgents won and gained control of government and the country with the direct assistance of their backers' military forces.

While outside support for insurgencies has continued since the end of the Cold War, the dimensions and nature of this aid and the identity of the providers have changed significantly. Although both the United States and Russia, to varying degrees, still offer insurgents support, hundreds of millions of dollars no longer regularly flow from Washington's and Moscow's coffers. Iran and Pakistan are two of the most significant post-Cold War backers of insurgencies, but the resources they devote for this purpose pale in comparison to the support once offered by the United States and the Soviet Union. Indeed, state support is no longer the only, or necessarily the most important, game in town. Diasporas have played a particularly important role in sustaining several strong insurgencies. The Palestinian, Irish, Tamil, and Kurdish diasporas, for example, have helped foster strong insurgencies that have weathered concerted attacks of dedicated states. Diasporas play a particularly important role in funding and, although precise figures are unavailable, have probably surpassed states as the main financial sources for insurgencies today. Diaspora support has tended to be far more reliable than state support, which is more likely to suddenly disappear or be reduced.

Support has also come from other types of non-state actors, including refugees, guerrilla groups, and individuals. Some of these non-state actors have played a significant role in creating or sustaining an insurgency, offering fighters, training militants, giving money, or providing other important forms of support. Afghan refugees swelled the ranks of the Taliban, enabling the movement to conquer much of Afghanistan. Insurgent groups such as Hezbollah or Liberia's National Patriotic Front have armed and trained guerrilla fighters in third countries, helping to launch often-potent cross-border rebel movements. Religious organizations such as Usama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network and even wealthy individuals have at times also made substantial contributions to insurgent movements. Understanding the nature of external backing today requires recognizing the important contributions of this widening range of non-state actors.

Both state and non-state support for an insurgency can make a movement far more effective, prolong the war, increase the scale and lethality of its struggle, and may even transform a civil conflict into an international war. Like other foreign policy tools, the effects can be both positive and negative; they are also often unpredictable. Although the actual overthrow of an enemy government is relatively rare (though not unheard of), the aid provided to an insurgency can often produce a number of less-ambitious benefits, such as weakening a hostile government and strengthening a rival group's bid for power or simply demonstrating support for ethnic kin. At the same time, external support can provoke other parties to intervene, escalating limited strife into full-blown conflict. Such diffusion and escalation is often difficult to anticipate and can produce greater instability. Insurgent movements themselves often face a difficult dilemma: Although they have much to gain from outside support, it often comes with a price, imposing undesirable political or military restrictions and even diminishing a group's legitimacy.

In recent years, however, the issue of external support for insurgencies has received relatively scant attention, given the end of the Cold War and the demise of a US-Soviet rivalry. This seminar series attempts to fill some of the conceptual and intellectual gaps by surveying the current status of outside support for insurgent movements and assessing its impact and implications. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following four key questions:

  • What are the external sources of support for insurgencies today?
  • What are the characteristics and motivations of the supporters?
  • What key differences can be discerned between state and non-state
    supporters?
  • On what aspects of an insurgency's struggle does outside support
    have the most and least impact?

Finding answers to these questions is important because it helps intelligence analysts better identify the factors that affect the conduct of insurgencies and better predict their success or failure. Focusing specifically on outside support for insurgencies may prove particularly promising, as it offers a means through which policymakers can influence an insurgency's progress without direct intervention in the country in question.



Session 2
Session 1Session 3