Nonstate Actors in Intrastate Conflicts

8. Domestic-Regional Interactions and Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflicts: Insights from Lebanon

C h a p t e r 8 Domestic-Regional Interactions and Outside Intervention in Intrastate Conflicts: Insights from Lebanon Avraham Sela and Oren Barak The two decades since the end of the Cold War have witnessed numerous intrastate conflicts (especially in the Balkans, Africa, and the Middle East) and various forms of outside intervention (particularly military intervention and mediation) designed to ameliorate them. Yet most of these conflicts (e.g., in Somalia, Iraq, and Sudan) turned out to be difficult if not impossible for external forces to cope with. The overall record of outside intervention in these conflicts shows more failures than successes; and political settlements reached due to outside efforts seem fragile and temporary.1 At the same time, attempts by students of International Relations to explain the success and failure of outside intervention in these conflicts by focusing on the intervening parties, their motivations, modes of organization, coordination, and legitimacy have reached a deadlock. This is best represented through the growing criticism of the very concept of international intervention as a method for coping with the challenges posed by intrastate conflict.2 This chapter aims to shift the focus of interest from the international to the domestic-regional arena as the primary context for explaining the success or failure of outside intervention in intrastate conflict. We argue that in “zones of conflict”—namely, developing regions characterized by permeable state borders, robust substate and supranational identities, underdeveloped economy and weak or absent regional institutions3 —the complex and largely Domestic-Regional Interactions and Intervention 167 informal interactions between domestic actors such as ethnic groups (or communities), clans, tribes, and geographical regions, on the one hand, and regional actors (sovereign states, regional organizations, and VITNAs), on the other hand, have a significant impact on the success or failure of outside intervention in intrastate conflicts. Drawing on insights from the fields of international security, ethnic conflicts , and political sociology (especially regarding the role of social networks and patron-client relationships), the chapter elucidates the nature of these shifting domestic-regional interactions and their influence on outside intervention in intrastate conflicts. Assuming that domestic and regional actors are the first to be affected by outside intervention and are thus likely to respond according to perceived and fluctuating opportunities and constraints, we identify the conditions under which such actors would incline to support or reject attempts to reach a political settlement to an intrastate conflict. By calling attention to this critical factor, the chapter challenges existing theories of international intervention in intrastate conflicts that explain the success and failure of these efforts mainly in neorealist systemic terms. In order to substantiate our thesis, we provide a detailed examination of the Lebanese conflict (1975–1990). This intrastate conflict was marked not only by high levels of violence and massive involvement by Lebanon’s neighbors and by global forces (especially the United States and the UN), but also by complex interactions between various types of domestic and regional actors . A major factor accounting for the success or failure of consecutive outside interventions in this conflict was the support for, or resistance to, these efforts by these changing domestic-regional alignments. The Lebanese conflict , which has not yet been explored from this angle, is illustrative due to its protracted and intensive nature, the varied forms of outside intervention that characterized it, and the two decades that elapsed since its successful termination, which allow for a reconsideration of how it is commonly perceived. In the first part of the chapter, we discuss the post-Cold War debate on international intervention in intrastate conflicts, which is still characterized by an overly formal approach that overlooks the complex interactions between domestic and regional actors and their impact in these contexts. We then focus on the nature of these domestic-regional interactions in zones of conflict, particularly in the Middle East. In the third section, we zoom in on the Lebanese conflict , analyzing its causes and the factors behind its protracted nature. In particular, we emphasize the role of domestic-regional interactions in 168 Avraham Sela and Oren Barak obstructing the process of elite accommodation and exacerbating centrifugal tendencies in Lebanon in the mid-1970s. We then focus on the three major crises that erupted during the conflict—in 1975–1976, 1982–1984, and 1988– 1990—which were characterized by the use of massive military force and intensive diplomatic efforts by outside forces. As we show, the success...