Warlordism Essay ⋆ Political Science Essay Examples ⋆ EssayEmpire

Warlords are nonstate actors who control people and territory through de facto military rule. The militarized groups that the warlords control are similar to gangs or other domestic illegal organizations. These organizations steal from and engage in illicit economic activity. Warlords tend to operate in weak states, where the government is unable to contest powerful nonstate actors. Warlords can benefit from patronage and illegal trading to clients both inside and outside of the state they inhabit.

A major distinction between warlord rule and the government of a weak state is that the warlord’s organization seldom seeks public goods and projects and concentrates on accumulating private wealth. While warlords do make strategic decisions, they do not act on behalf of the general population. Warlord rule is typically highly personalized. The death of a warlord may create a power vacuum, which then results in in-group fighting and domestic political chaos. In some areas controlled by warlords, local groups enforce a patronage structure of the warlord in return for protection and economic stability. However, most warlords do not require the assistance of local populations and prefer to directly control territory. One of the most famous examples of warlord rule is in early twentieth century China, when the Qing dynasty dissolved into a collection of feuding generals. Likewise, early modern Japan was under warlord rule during the relatively stable Edo period (1603–1868). Contemporary states in Africa and South America also have been ruled by warlords. These weakened states can give rise to warlords, such as in Somalia (1991–present), as well as areas in present-day Columbia and Mexico.

Warlords may emerge in any failing political system, and several preconditions help define when a warlord may assume power. Often, warlords fill power vacuums created when other personalized regimes collapse, or when a state begins transforming to a new style of government. Individuals with personal power bases and support by prominent economic leaders may militarize their organizations. A crumbling state apparatus may no longer protect private interests, and opportunistic business leaders may take advantage of this weak state by interfering with or removing either political or economic rivals.

Warlords tend to seize power when a state is in decline or in newly formed states. Warlords may take advantage of weak state structures to build a power base outside of state influence, such as areas of the country where the state’s military forces neglect. States, either for social, economic, or strategic reasons, may fail to enforce laws or even exhibit a presence in parts of a state. Here, opportunistic criminals build support and gain de facto political and military rule over a region. Warlords are especially likely to arise when public services are declining and the overall wealth of the people is declining. Warlords then seize control over a region and offer supporters positive rewards or negative incentives for their support. They may take advantage of existing social cleavages and gain the support of one ethnic, religious, or regional group at the expense of other groups.

Some warlords have maintained their rule throughout their lifetime, dying while in control of different territories. Successors can be preappointed lieutenants or relatives. However, another common fate is that their status as a de facto military rule is cut short. Rival militants may kill or exile a warlord to assume control of a territory. Sometimes, warlords are incorporated into a formal central government. Central governments may find incorporating existing warlords is necessary to gain back the state’s sovereignty. For instance, coalition governments seeking legitimacy across the state may find it impossible without the warlord’s consent.

States may offer incentives for warlords to coordinate their rule in an ad hoc governing council. In such situations, the state pragmatically acknowledges the warlord’s legitimacy and may work toward a peaceful state rather than a lawful one. Here, fighting a warlord may lead to an internecine conflict, which results in a weaker state, impoverished people, and, perhaps, more support for the warlord.

Bibliography:

Bunker, Robert J. Non-state Threats and Future Wars. Portland, Ore.: Frank Cass, 2003.
Jackson, Robert. Quasi-states: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Reno, William. Warlord Politics and African States. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner, 1998.
Thomas, Troy, Stephen Kiser, and William Casebeer. Warlords Rising: Confronting Violent Non-state Actors. Lanham, Md.: Lexington, 2005.

This example Warlordism Essay is published for educational and informational purposes only. If you need a custom essay or research paper on this topic please use our writing services. EssayEmpire.com offers reliable custom essay writing services that can help you to receive high grades and impress your professors with the quality of each essay or research paper you hand in.