“Chenoweth admits that “the success of the Libyan uprising will, no doubt, be remembered as a successful case of violent insurgency.” However, as she argues, a nonviolent resistance never had time to take hold.”
“Dr. Erica Chenoweth, Assistant Professor of Government at Wesleyan University looks at the strategic advantage of nonviolent struggle and civil resistance. Armed insurgency may have triumphed in the Algerian war of independence, the Chinese Revolution, and the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan. These cases, among others, have convinced many observers that violent insurgency is likely to succeed. Moreover, insurgents often claim that they turn to violence as a last resort, having exhausted all other methods of seeking redress for their grievances. Professor Chenoweth challenges both claims, arguing that nonviolent resistance has actually been more effective in the 20th century than violent resistance. She presents a new data set, which provides robust statistical evidence of the strategic superiority of nonviolent resistance, even in cases where the opponent regime is brutal. The research implies that violent resistance is seldom necessary, as many insurgents claim. Rather, civil resistance can be an effective substitute for insurgency in civil wars.”
August 26th, 2011 at 9:32 am
Recent events in the Arab world have given Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan’s Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict an important timeliness.
Erica Chenoweth recently wrote Think Again: Nonviolent Resistance, published in Foreign Policy, which we will feature next week. She also just published an article on the web site Waging Nonviolence in which she examines the question of whether nonviolence resistance could have worked succeeded in Libya.
Chenoweth admits that “the success of the Libyan uprising will, no doubt, be remembered as a successful case of violent insurgency.” However, as she argues, a nonviolent resistance never had time to take hold. Qaddafi’s crackdown on peaceful protest turned violent very quickly which led rebels to adopt violence. Nonviolent campaigns, Chenoweth points out, need time to organize and to develop other methods of resistance such as boycotts, work slowdowns, etc. The turn to violence by Libyan rebels put them in a precarious position and gave Qaddafi a pretext for adopting extremely harsh measures. While Chenoweth admits that Qaddafi would have undoubtedly repressed a nonviolent protest movement, she suggests that “adopting violence put the rebels at a major force disadvantage, and it’s unlikely that they would have succeeded without NATO’s air support.”
Erica Chenoweth concludes by citing reports of the role civil resistance did play in the success of the Libyan uprising. She writes:
Khaled Darwish’s op-ed in the New York Times today seems to corroborate this account, describing how women and children rushed into the streets of Tripoli before the rebel advance, how civilians blocked apartment rooftops from snipers, and how they sang and chanted over loudspeakers in unity against Qaddafi’s regime. If these descriptions are true, then civil resistance had a pretty important part in the “endgame” of the Libyan revolution, and as such, deserves at least some credit for the opposition’s victory.
VIDEO – US Secretary of State Clinton lies about Gaddafi: http://youtu.be/_IyRezDYbcI
VIDEO – Clinton on Qaddafi: “We came, we saw, he died”: http://youtu.be/6DXDU48RHLU
Clinton on Libya and Syria: http://tinyurl.com/d8rrnm9
VIDEO – Al-Qaeda Active in Syria: http://youtu.be/GDrVxxUlHLs
VIDEO – USIP/ICNC – Erica Chenoweth on “Why Civil Resistance Works”: http://youtu.be/Beep0xnonvk
Article: Why is ICNC so afraid of people who say Jews and Israel were behind 9/11?: http://wp.me/pPnn7-Ko