In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

c h a p t e r o n e Introduction the Challenge of Understanding the dual Logic of Armed-Political Organizations in recent decades, armed groups have shown an increased interest in creating political parties to take part in institutional politics. By using these political wings to participate in elections and to win public office, some armed groups have gained enormous political and decision-making power. even though this trend has been scarcely researched and analyzed, the influence of such hybrid political and armed organizations can be substantial. Consider two events that took place in 2006: the sweeping electoral victory of the Palestinian Hamas, an armed group and a political party, followed by its takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, and the July 2006 war between israel and the Lebanese Hezbollah, an organization that also operates both as a sophisticated quasi-army and as a powerful domestic political party. More recently, with the Arab Awakening shaking up the status quo and the political landscape in the Middle east, the crucial question has been how to understand and integrate armed groups into institutional politics. the book approaches this subject by seeking to answer two main questions: (1) Why do armed groups decide to establish political wings to compete in elections ? (2) What conditions lead the political wing to become the primary means of expression of the armed group, ultimately leading to the relinquishment of the group’s weapons? Armed Groups and Political Wing Formation: the dynamics behind Political Participation the existing literature on the dynamics of political involvement of armed groups is scarce. the focus is on either what accounts for a group’s relinquishment of violence and its transition toward adopting an unarmed strategy,1 or on what factors shape the organizational behavior of a given armed group once it has fully transformed into a political party.2  Armed Political Organizations Much less attention has been devoted to analyzing the internal dynamics and external factors that lead armed groups to create a political wing—defined as a special subunit within an armed group that engages in aboveground institutional political activities through contending elections and assuming office if elected.3 Less research has also been conducted on participation in institutional politics of “hybrid” organizations that operate simultaneously as armed groups and political parties. Among the most significant examples of scholarly works that deal with the process of political wing formation, it is important to mention Anisseh Van engeland and rachel rudolph’s study on armed groups’ transition “from terrorism to politics ,” and Leonard Weinberg, Ami Pedahzur, and Arie Perliger’s book exploring the relation between terrorist groups and political parties.4 Both examples serve as a useful starting point for further research. Van engeland and rudolph focus their analysis of political wing formation dynamics on defining the parameters that indicate an armed group’s commitment to politics. in their work, a given armed group has a high potential to shift toward institutional politics if it has a concrete commitment to participate in the governance system (“political will”), a political ideology and electoral program, together with a concrete set of policies and relations with other domestic and international political actors. the political transition is also facilitated by a high degree of internal cohesion and leadership commitment toward politics.5 Weinberg, Pedahzur, and Perliger’s research is even more comprehensive, focusing not only on the internal factors that can shape a group’s transition toward institutional politics but also on how the group’s environment can contribute to this shift. they identify four main factors that can lead to a group’s transition toward institutional politics. these are a transformation in the political system toward democracy , an amnesty from the government, an increase in the military repression of the group, and an internal desire to better communicate with the group’s social basis and thus better compete with other political organizations.6 the book focuses less on addressing the relation of relative causal importance between these factors. this book builds on the existing literature, expanding its scope and deepening the level of analysis. First, although it considers the importance of a group’s internal commitment to change, the book argues that this factor is necessary but not sufficient to ensure a political transition. Second, the study tries to create a more complex model that accounts for the decision to create a political wing. this draws from Weinberg, Pedahzur, and Perliger’s research but considers other important institutional and external causes of...

Share