Even though many countries have undergone economic and social development since the end of World War II, some of them have witnessed recurrent series of violence. Civil wars and battles have become frequent and unrelenting. Every year since 1950, approximately 5 percent of nations globally have experienced a civil war, as well as about 31 percent of nations globally (53 nations), have suffered a civil for some time (Fearon, 2004). Twenty-five percent of nations have undergone not less than ten years of civil war during that time. The average stretch of a civil war that has ever existed is approximately eight years and in the past decade, 90 percent of civil wars that were witnessed in nations had already suffered from it in the past three decades (Slantchev, 2012). This paper is going to explore why revolution movements succeed and fail and the different factors that led to these civil wars.
Cases of Revolutionary Movements that Have Occurred
Several revolutions come up, but just a few of them are successful. Revolution is a process that is initiated to overcome some power in a violent manner so that a far-reaching reorganization of the policies, economy, society and external links of a nation is effectively achieved. Just as significant, most revolutionary movements that have become successful or otherwise, share so much in common. The most composition of their leadership and memberships is urban youths (Dix, 1984). Their perspectives have often appeared to be blends of one or another form of unorthodox Marxism as well as nationalism, and the strategy they have adopted in their revolutionary movement has been greatly dictated by the ‘foco’ approach that Ernesto Che Guevara promoted. Fidel Castro and his associates participated in a revolution that occurred in Cuba and they assumedly practiced this approach in their discussions.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The impression of how the Cuban Revolution happened and how some Latin American revolutions were supposed to happen, suggests that a small, committed group of mobile radicals can, by their actions of forceful brutalities concurrently destabilize the government and bring multitudes to their sides (Sobek & Payne, 2010). In this kind of revolutionary approach, the guerrilla band supersedes the party that in fact arises from the armed revolutionary troops. This type of revolution is by action and a model that de-underlines ideology, extended structural or publicized preparations, and the existence of an exact group of objective requirements. According to Balch and Andrew (2000), the revolutionary movements have all come up at some point, succeeded or failed, in the moderately restrictive time-frame between 1953 (the first revolution that happened by Fidel Castro) and 1983 (the current revolution in El Salvador).
Factors that Lead to Success or Failure of Revolution Movements
Taxation and Borrowing
Taxation and borrowing have proved to be the most predominant factor that begin war finance in a country. Few governments such as the one headed by Frederick the Great can go to war founded on a present “war chest.” They attacked Silesia in 1740 utilizing the 8-million thaler reserve of money that his forerunner had tolerantly gathered during his reign as the president (Tanter & Midlarsky, 1967). Even with the presence of these investments and capital, they are speedily exhausted very quickly, than the governments could think they would.
When Athens initiated a war with Sparta, Pericles thought that he had sufficient reserve that would help the city to make them victorious for quite some time, and definitely, Athens financed the war majorly from the capital. Unfortunately, in 425 BC, their funds were depleted and the government was compelled to begin taxing the citizens and a new levy was pronounced on the partners (Katz, 2003). The point is, even with the resourceful countries, the heavy burden of war causes their resources to be quickly depleted and they have to supplement their budget with the tax base. It is a common situation even for developed nations such as Britain, who have to back up themselves by maintaining a moderately effective system of tax payment. The efforts to heighten taxation during the war can extremely be dangerous since they can spark revolutions, as the army is always committed at the front, and could lead to a rebellion such as Louis XIV recurrently witnessed (Slantchev, 2012). Therefore, having enough reserves is one of the factors that is significant in making revolution movements succeed, while fewer reserves will definitely make the movements fail.
Economy and Migration
Civil wars in Asia have insisted for a long time on average than others in any other place. Only a few of these regions show the same dynamics. The government is conquered and often christened for a majority of the ethnic community whose members undergo population burden in the ancient farming spaces. Consequently, a lot of them move to less populated regions and less developed bordering parts of the nation, often with the input of the state development programs (Kingstone, Young, & Aubrey, 2013). The bordering regions are occupied by ethnic subgroups, who in some cases begin a revolution to resist migrants and the state that is supporting them. Such insurgencies was witnessed by Chakma community that lived in Chittagong Hills of Bangladesh for more than two decades; the Muslim Moros that occupied in the South region of Philippines for more than three decades; Nagas and some ethnic community in Northeast India who lived there close to five decades; and among others (Tanter & Midlarsky, 1967).
Financial Reserves
Another factor that may tactfully distinguish prolonged support for civil wars is the revolutionary groups utilizing finances from contraband groups like cocaine, precious pieces of jewelry, or cannabis sativa. Dix (1984) explains that the rebels are financed to fight for a long time through the contraband, which also motivates the supply of weapons to the groups. Sometimes foreign countries or ethnic movements outside the country support these rebels. Countries such Colombia have had the longest running civil wars for about 37 years and cocaine being the contraband here (Katz, 2003). Angola has gone for close to three decades by depending on diamonds. Bruma has been sustained by marijuana for several years, particularly in Shan region and Siera Leone has sustained civil wars for close to a decade because of diamonds.
Corruption Practices
Greed and misconceived grievance have significant similarities regarding how revolutionary groups spring up. They offer a similar description – opportunity and viability dictate the common circumstances that are important to gain profit, or from rebel organizations. Primary commodities are linked to other factors that may stir up civil war such as deprived public service provision, corrupt practices and economic mishandling (Fearon, 2004). Hypothetically, any rise in conflict risks could be because of rebel answers to such deprived governance in place of financial openings. During the period of cold war, each great power nation reinforced rebellions in nations associated with the opposing power.
The Theory of the Rebel Military Advantage
There is the rebel military advantage that can cause more revolution groups to insist on the civil wars against another. The one event of rebel military advantage that continues to spark a serious discourse is population spread and social fractionalization. Similar to the theory of Herbst, nations that have an exceedingly concentrated population are less likely to engage in a conflict. However, those that are sparsely populated may not in many cases live peaceably, they have a higher chance of engaging into a war (about 37 percent) (Kingstone, Young, & Aubrey, 2013). This relates to the hypothesis that cohesion is significant for rebel significance. Social fractionalization causes a community to be considerably secure and safer also. A highly fractionalized region has a 25 percent chance of conflict rate lower than a homogenous region (Tanter & Midlarsky, 1967). Thus, sparsely populated societies will hardly have a revolution movement success.
The Current Situation of Revolutionary Movements
With the end of the Second World War, several people thought and anticipated for a new period that promoted global unity and peace. Unfortunately, what has been currently witnessed is a particularism rebellion that has is depicted by refurbished stress on consistent pressure for group power, reputation and group individuality that have dominated the world during the 1990s era. In the 19th and 20th centuries, nationalism, as well as socialism, had brought together individuals from a diverse culture who sought for a common goal (Balch & Andrew, 2000). Unfortunately today, the failure of movements globally because of this socialism and the retreating influence of national and states resulting from globalization, appeared to prompt long-repressed religion and ethnic conflicts. Partly in response to the global coverage of secular culture founded on mass entertainment and feasting, powerful religious movements brought about several supports globally. Collier and Hoeffler (2004) emphasize that the United States similar to other nations underwent divisions that emanated from the rise of racial and ethical identities as well as religious aspects, even though in a greatly less extreme manner.
In conclusion, policymakers in most democracies are advised to be motivated to mediate civil wars to stop this exposure of innocent people to sufferings as well as physical destructions. The influence of third parties into the present civil wars is partly dependent on the comportment of some third party followers. Thus, the crucial part of intervening in these civil wars is not just intervening but simply organizing the inputs of third parties, a procedure that may engage increasing the costs to other third parties so that their interventions spearheaded by the third party are counteracted across the domestic opponents in the civil war. Therefore, the governments must continue to advocate for fairness, cooperation, and equal opportunities for all people to avoid the conflicts that lead to more revolution movements springing up .
References
Balch, L. D., & Andrew, J. E. (2000). "Killing Time: The World Politics of Civil War Duration, 1820–1992." International Studies Quarterly 44, no. 4 (2000), 615-42.
Collier, P., & Hoeffler, A. (2004). Greed and grievance in civil war. Oxford Economic Papers, 56 (4), 563-595.
Dix, R. (1984). Why Revolutions Succeed & Fail. Polity, 16 (3), 423-446.
Fearon, J. (2004). Why Do Some Civil Wars Last So Much Longer than Others? Journal of Peace Research, 41(3), 275-301.
Katz, M. (2003). Democratic revolutions: Why some succeed, why others fail. World Affairs.,166 (3), 163-170.
Kingstone, P., Young, J., & Aubrey, R. (2013). Resistance to Privatization: Why Protest Movements Succeed and Fail in Latin America. Latin American Politics and Society, 55 (3), 93-116.
Sobek, D., & Payne, C. (2010). A Tale of Two Types: Rebel Goals and the Onset of Civil Wars 1. International Studies Quarterly, 54(1), 213-240.
Tanter, R., & Midlarsky, M. (1967). A theory of revolution. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 11(3), 264-280.
Slantchev, B. (2012). War Finance and Coercive Bargaining . University of California, San Diego , 106(4), 1-39.
