Retribution or Reconciliation? Post-Conflict Attitudes Toward Enemy Collaborators

Authors

Kristen Kao
Mara R. Revkin, Duke Law SchoolFollow

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2023

Keywords

transitional justice, rebel governance, survey methodology, Iraq

Abstract

Armed groups seeking to govern territory require the cooperation of many civilians, who are widely perceived as enemy collaborators after conflict ends. The empirical literature on attitudes toward transitional justice focuses heavily on fighters, overlooking more nuanced understandings of proportional justice for civilian collaborators. Through a survey experiment conducted in an Iraqi city that was controlled by the Islamic State, we find that variations in the type of collaboration an actor engages in strongly determine preferences for punishment and forgiveness. While exposure to violence is associated with a greater desire for revenge, perceived volition behind an act—a relatively unstudied factor—is much more important. This research provides unique empirical data on the microfoundations of enemy collaborator culpability. By widening our analytical lens to consider a more realistically broad spectrum of enemy collaboration, we avoid affirming a false dichotomy between victims and perpetrators that is commonly adopted in postwar settings.

Citation

Kristen Kao & Mara R. Revkin, Retribution or Reconciliation? Post-Conflict Attitudes Toward Enemy Collaborators, 67 American Journal of Political Science 358-373 (2023)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.