Sierra Leone’s civil war (1991-2002) was brutal. Reports of ‘savagery’ were not simply displays of rhetoric.[i] Alongside an estimated 75,000 casualties, thousands were subjected to amputations, mutilations, and sexual violence.[ii] Atrocities were committed by all sides, but the amputations carried out by the rebel group Revolutionary United Front (RUF) became emblematic of the suffering inflicted on civilians.
In some cases, the violence of the war was so extreme it seemed to defy reason, but there was one explanation that captured the attention, and the imagination, of the international community: diamonds. A mindless lust for wealth could explain acts of ‘bewildering cruelty’, but a desire for diamonds could also be explained by a ‘rational’ need to finance the war.[iii] The popular link between diamonds and violence is neatly summed up in the 2006 film Blood Diamond, when Jennifer Connelly’s character says, ‘the people back home wouldn’t buy a ring if they knew it cost someone else their hand.’ The reality is, of course, more complex.
Greedy criminals
Given the seemingly inexplicable brutality of the conflict, a prominent school of thought sought to explain the violence by arguing that civil wars were a breakdown of the normal order. As the war began, social, moral, psychological, and political constraints were removed, and, in a ‘vortex of anarchy and lawlessness’, individuals used violence ‘in the service of gratifying their innate human lust for power and material wealth’.[iv] Perpetrators of extreme violence were written off as greedy criminals, who wanted only one thing: wealth. This argument has now been widely discredited. One issue is that it assumes that all those committing violence were inherently greedy, and, as Dr Yusuf Bangura observed, it is also ‘deeply flawed’ to assume ‘rational actions cannot be barbaric’.[v]
If a desire for diamonds motivated acts of atrocity, this could instead be explained by the argument that violence was used strategically as part of a wider campaign of terror to gain, and protect, access to the country’s diamond mining fields. Human Rights Watch reported numerous instances where civilians were abducted and subjected to forced labour in diamond mines, while accounts from the conflict tell of the Sierra Leone Army (SLA) torturing civilians who impeded their access to diamonds.[vi]
Brutality beyond greed
But if greed or economic gain were the cause of the violence, then why were acts committed that went beyond achieving these goals? Some instances of violence were so shocking that it seems unlikely they were motivated solely by a desire to extract the stones.[vii] Even if these fed into a wider strategy of terror, it is hard to believe, as Dr Kieran Mitton argues in his book on the atrocities of the civil war, that this was the main cause of the brutality, rather than ‘the consummatory rewards of violence itself’.[viii]
Status and shame
Feelings of shame amongst the perpetrators could explain why some committed extreme violence. The origins of the civil war have been linked to grievances around uneven development, and a lack of access to education, employment, and resources. Many who joined the RUF, whether voluntarily or by force, were from communities who had been increasingly marginalised. A desire to reverse the status-quo could therefore explain acts of violence committed by teenage fighters against local ‘big men’ and those in positions of power.[ix] Status could also be gained in committing sexual violence; ex-combatants reported that ‘those who participated in rape … were seen to be more courageous, valiant, and brave than their peers’.[x]
Atrocities may also have helped to redress feelings of shame that rebel recruits experienced upon capture when they were subjected to violence and humiliation.[xi] Carrying out dehumanising and degrading acts against others could have been a way for rebels to transfer their own feelings onto their victims. One woman, for example, recounted an experience she and her son endured at the hands of rebels which seemed to serve no purpose other than to humiliate.[xii]
Professor David Keen also argues that extreme violence seems to have been used to eliminate ‘the threat of shame’ in any civilians seen to be embodying it.[xiii] For example, if victims begged for mercy, this could lead to feelings of shame and guilt in the perpetrators. When fighters were faced with pleas for compassion, therefore, this could explain why they responded with further violence, as if they wanted to extinguish the moral judgement they perceived in the cries of their victims. This argument would also explain times onlookers were forced to laugh and clap as atrocities were carried out, as if the perpetrators were compelling approval of their actions.[xiv]
Dehumanisation and disgust
Violence that aimed to reverse or remove feelings of shame could also have been shaped by the emotion of disgust. The RUF claimed from the outset that it was fighting to cleanse society of its ‘rotten’ and corrupt elements, and instances of brutality may have been provoked by a belief among the rebels that their enemies were disgusting and sub-human. Similarly, a belief among the RUF’s enemies that the rebels were beasts and bush devils in turn could explain the use of extreme violence against them.[xv]
But, in the eyes of the perpetrators, the use of gratuitous violence could not only be justified against those seen to be inhuman, it could also be used to render victims sub-human. Amputations and ‘messy’ mutilations, for example, turned victims into ‘the disgusting beings they were supposed to be’.[xvi] There is an argument in the psychology literature that dehumanisation plays more of a role in ‘instrumental’ violence, where the violence is a means to an end, and less in ‘moral’ violence, where the violence can be justified as punishment or retribution.[xvii] By denying victims their humanity, extreme violence was instrumental in two ways. The perpetrators could reinforce the need for violence, and so justify their cause. At the same time, they could also rid themselves of the shame associated with carrying out this violence. Disgust was both a driver and an outcome of atrocities.
Fear
Threading throughout motivations of shame and disgust is the presence of fear: fear of contamination, fear of shame, and fear of moral judgement. Given that so many RUF combatants were forcibly recruited, it is logical to assume fear could in some part explain the cause of atrocities. Testimonies from ex-combatants highlight the role this played in motivating acts of violence.[xviii] Although such accounts could have been given in an attempt to minimise personal responsibility, most RUF combatants did not join voluntarily, and, given the brutalisation process which the group subjected its recruits to, it is clear that violent behaviours were something that had to be taught and enforced.[xix] One boy who was abducted by the RUF aged 15 said ‘when you are captured, you have to change or you become a dead man’.[xx]
Despite the popular link, diamonds on their own do not give a clear-cut explanation for the extreme violence carried out during Sierra Leone’s civil war. Feelings of revenge, fear, disgust, shame, and pride all undoubtedly played a role, while other factors, such as drug use and brutalisation, also deserve attention. To try to explain the atrocities of the civil war is not to try to justify them, but, if we can increase our understanding of what drives people to commit extreme violence, practitioners and policymakers will be better equipped to prevent and address such acts in the future.
[i] Dowden, R. (1995, January 31). Sierra Leone savagery rips nation apart. The Independent. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/sierra-leone-savagery-rips-nation-apart-1570525.html
[ii] Hoffman, D. (2004). The Civilian Target in Sierra Leone and Liberia: Political Power, Military Strategy, and Humanitarian Intervention. African Affairs, 103(411), 211-226. https://doi.org/10.1093/afraf/adh025
[iii] Gberie, L. (2005). A Dirty War in West Africa: The RUF and the Destruction of Sierra Leone. Hurst & Company.
[iv] Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[v] Bangura, Y. (2004). The Political and Cultural Dynamics of the Sierra Leone War: A Critique of Paul Richards. In I. Abdullah (Ed.), Between Democracy and Terror: The Sierra Leone Civil War (pp. 13-40). Council for the Development of Social Science Research in Africa.
[vi] Human Rights Watch. (2001). World Report 2001: Sierra Leone. Accessed at: https://www.hrw.org/legacy/wr2k1/africa/sierraleone.html; Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Sierra Leone (TRC). (2004). Witness to Truth: Report of the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Volume 3B). Accessed at: https://www.sierraleonetrc.org/
[vii] Human Rights Watch. (2003, January 16). “We’ll Kill You If You Cry”: Sexual Violence in the Sierra Leone Conflict. Human Rights Watch report 15(1) (A). https://www.hrw.org/report/2003/01/16/well-kill-you-if-you-cry/sexual-violence-sierra-leone-conflict
[viii] Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[ix] Keen, D. (1998). The Economic Functions of Violence in Civil Wars (Special Issue). Adelphi Papers, 38(320), 1-89.
[x] Cohen, D. K. (2013). Female Combatants and the Perpetration of Violence: Wartime Rape in the Sierra Leone Civil War. World Politics, 65(3), 383–415. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887113000105
[xi] Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[xii] Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Sierra Leone (TRC). (2004). Witness to Truth: Report of the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Volume 3B). Accessed at: https://www.sierraleonetrc.org/
[xiii] Keen, D. (2005). Conflict & Collusion in Sierra Leone. James Currey.
[xiv] Human Rights Watch. (1999, July). Getting Away with Murder, Mutilation, Rape: New Testimony from Sierra Leone. Human Rights Watch report 11(3) (A). https://www.hrw.org/reports/1999/sierra/index.htm
[xv] Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[xvi] Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[xvii] Brudholm, T., & Lang, J. (2021). On hatred and dehumanization. In M. Kronfeldner (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of dehumanization (pp. 341–354). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429492464-chapter22
[xviii] Coulter, C. (2008). Female Fighters in the Sierra Leone War: Challenging the Assumptions? Feminist Review, 88(1), 54–73. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.fr.9400385; Denov, M. S. (2010). Child soldiers: Sierra Leone’s Revolutionary United Front. Cambridge University Press; Gberie, L. (2005). A Dirty War in West Africa: The RUF and the Destruction of Sierra Leone. Hurst & Company.
[xix] Humphreys, M., & Weinstein, J. M. (2004, July). What the Fighters Say: A Survey of Ex-Combatants in Sierra Leone June-August 2003. Accessed at: http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/Report1_BW.pdf; Mitton, K. (2015). Rebels in a Rotten State. Oxford University Press.
[xx] Keen, D. (2005). Conflict & Collusion in Sierra Leone. James Currey.
In Mosul, Iraq, efforts are underway to help the city move forward after decades of violent conflict and devastation under the rule of Saddam Hussein, the US occupation, and the brutal reign of Islamic State (IS).
One initiative which was created to support the city’s recovery was a community tree-planting project called Green Mosul. Green Mosul was developed by the Mosul Eye organisation with a dual objective to raise awareness of the climate crisis and to unite diverse communities after years of division and conflict.
The Green Mosul project was launched in 2022 with the goal of planting trees across the region, and Mosul Eye sought to involve the local population from the outset. If different parts of society could work together on the shared goal of making the city green, it was hoped that this would facilitate communication between divided communities, as well as offer them a chance to disconnect from the social and religious problems of the city.
The project made a concerted effort to choose religious and cultural sites to plant trees in. In this way, these places were turned into green public areas that could be enjoyed by all Mosulis, encouraging the pubic to see these heritage sites as shared spaces and not just for those from a particular community.
The planting of trees in cultural and religious sites also had another aim. Omar Mohammed, the founder of Mosul Eye, hoped that Mosulis would see that Mosul’s heritage was not just buildings, but the trees and the green spaces around them – and that this heritage needed to be protected too. When IS took control of Mosul, the city suffered an enormous amount of loss and devastation. The terrorist group might not come back but, if the climate crisis isn’t addressed, Mosul could face destruction of a different kind.
Mosul, historically known as the city of two springs due to its temperate autumn, is directly impacted by the climate crisis. The city now experiences longer and more intense heatwaves, reduced water flow, and an increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods. This not only risks the health of the city’s population, but has profound socio-economic implications. Agriculture in the region relies on predictable weather patterns. With changes in rainfall and temperature come rising food prices, higher poverty levels, and increased migration as people move away from rural areas to seek better living conditions.
On top of this, Mosul’s rich cultural heritage is at risk, as extreme weather events and changing environmental conditions can accelerate the deterioration of its many historic buildings and archaeological sites.
Mohammed believes that trees offered an ideal entry point for introducing environmental education to Mosul. Trees symbolise life and renewal, but they also play a key role in mitigating the climate crisis. To start the conversation on the climate crisis, Mohammed organised workshops and community meetings alongside the planting of trees, which encouraged locals to engage in discussions about trees, the climate crisis, and the effects of both on the local environment.
For Mohammed, it was important to make sure the impact of the climate crisis was discussed in a locally meaningful context. After years of conflict and destruction, the focus for most Mosulis was on restoring their livelihoods and rebuilding their lives, and Mohammed knew that many people wouldn’t engage with global narratives on the climate crisis while they had more immediate problems to deal with.
For example, when several neighbourhoods in the Al-Jadidae area of Mosul were experiencing water shortages, Green Mosul engaged the community in discussions about how the climate crisis impacts water availability and agricultural productivity and the need for sustainable water management practices.
In Mosul’s Old City, Green Mosul encouraged residents to consider the climate crisis and the importance of green spaces as they rebuilt their homes. The Old City had suffered immense destruction under IS’ reign, and the extensive use of heavy building machinery in reconstruction efforts was exacerbating the already-poor air quality. One resident, inspired by the project, transformed a narrow alley near his home in the Dakkah Barakah neighbourhood into a vibrant green space.
Green Mosul also arranged tree-planting events with local schools, businesses, and organisations in the hope this would foster collective action and introduce a sense of ownership and responsibility towards the environment. One participant, Anas, remarked that ‘planting these trees made me realise my role in combating the climate crisis. I am now more conscious of my daily actions and their environmental impact.’
As the city visibly turned greener, Green Mosul was able to attract the interest of both the public and the media, and to raise awareness of the need for sustainable practices and long-term strategies to safeguard the environment.
Through the planting of trees, Mosul Eye also found a language for the first time to speak to people about their areas without having to speak about sectarianism.
In Tel Skuf, 28km north of Mosul, the park in front of Mar Gorgis Church was transformed, thanks to Green Mosul, into a communal space that encouraged interaction and unity among different groups. In this instance, the need for more green areas became a bridge that allowed communities to engage across other divides and overcome tensions that had previously separated them.
In Bashiqa, another beneficiary of the Green Mosul project, farmers from different religious backgrounds came together to share knowledge about sustainable farming practices and crop rotation techniques, collaborating on a community garden project that utilised ancient irrigation methods to conserve water and increase crop yields. This practical co-operation resulted in improved agricultural output and strengthened inter-communal relationships.
In many places across the region, collaboration triumphed over division. In programme activities, conversations about Tal Afar no longer focused on Sunnis and Shia, but on the water springs and the green areas. When people spoke about Sinjar, they no longer talked about Muslims and Yezidis, but of the mountains and their importance. Discussions around the Nineveh Plains centred not on Christians and Muslims, but farming and green spaces.
The Green Mosul project ended in March 2023, but the universities and the local government have committed to continuing to plant trees, and Mosul Eye is still working to facilitate discussions on the climate crisis. The organisation knows that addressing the issue not only provides an opportunity to support post-conflict reconciliation in a divided city, but it also helps to protect the city’s future.
Mohammed has recently convinced the University of Mosul’s Central Library to create a section on the climate crisis, and he is currently working with schools to get the topic of the climate crisis included in the curriculum. Although this initiative may take time, it is a crucial step towards embedding the climate crisis education from an early age and instilling hope and optimism about the future.
The project has also empowered individuals to take steps of their own. Ahmed, a citizen of Mosul and a volunteer with Green Mosul, has initiated advocacy efforts within his community to promote recycling and revitalisation of green spaces in Mosul. Abdulrahman, an agricultural engineer hired by Mosul Eye to conduct a study on soil health in Mosul, was so shocked by the extent of the city’s environmental damage that he has taken it upon himself to increase awareness about this problem in the academic community. In response to these efforts, the University of Mosul has been more proactive in integrating studies focused on the climate crisis in Mosul into its curriculum.
Through Green Mosul, Mosul Eye also successfully arranged the first international conference on the climate crisis in Mosul. For the first time, amidst the city’s ruins, people engaged in discussions about the climate crisis. Mohammed hopes that Mosul will become part of the global discourse on the climate crisis because, if Mosulis see that someone around the world is talking about the climate crisis in their city, they might be inspired to take the initiative themselves. He also hopes that they will set an example to other activists: if the people of Mosul, in the midst of destruction, can still discuss and tackle the climate crisis, then it should be possible anywhere.
Find out more about Green Mosul in this interview with Dr Omar Mohammed, for the XCEPT research project at King’s College London.
Over the past decade, the number and intensity of both inter- and intrastate conflicts has been rising. In 2022, mostly due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the war between the Government of Ethiopia and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), the number of battle-related deaths from interstate conflicts reached its highest number since 1984.[i] According to the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), in the first month of 2024, one in six people around the world were estimated to have been exposed to conflict.[ii]
Human history, and our present, is rife with conflict, but researchers are still short of comprehensive theories that could explain the common ‘logic’ of conflicts across specific contexts. Why do people enter into conflict in situations when they could agree a peaceful settlement instead? The dynamics of conflict are incredibly complex and depend on countless, constantly evolving factors, from the environment to the unique individuals comprising the groups. This creates a serious challenge for predicting the emergence of conflict and its consequences. Models offer a means to consider various elements in parallel, untangling the complexity of conflict dynamics.
Models are sets of formulas developed by researchers to describe how different factors interact, integrating abstract theories to give a simplified, testable representation of real-life conflict. As the study of conflict is multidisciplinary, models provide a common language for researchers working in disparate fields, from political science to evolutionary biology. This is important as it allows for conflict analysis to integrate findings from different academic disciplines, and this can uncover new insights.
In one example, a model analysing strategic incentives for mass killings brought together several existing theories which yielded new, and somewhat unexpected, results: namely that constraints on the magnitude of mass killings, such as third-party intervention, may actually increase their probability under certain conditions.[iii] Models can also inspire further research by providing predictions that must then be tested against data collected from real conflicts.
A prototypical model of conflict is a simple ‘bargaining game’. In this model, two groups or individuals negotiate how to distribute something of value, which results in either a peaceful resolution or fighting. If fighting takes place, this item of value, be it a material or symbolic resource, is divided according to the outcomes of the conflict, but some of its value is destroyed, rendering aggression inefficient and collectively undesirable. Conflict dynamics are rarely that straightforward, and this model makes certain assumptions, such as theorising that groups are made up of members who have the same characteristics and who all act in the same way. Nevertheless, this still provides a useful base from which to generate testable hypotheses.
While models simplify various elements of conflict, they are beginning to take more detail into account. An example of this is the consideration of group heterogeneity. Groups in a conflict are not homogenous units, but are instead made up of individual agents with different motivations, identities, classes, behaviours, and more. Including these differences in models can significantly influence their predictions.
One facet of this heterogeneity is the difference in social classes within a population. A series of models by economists Esteban and Ray predicted that conflict was more likely to occur if religious or ethnic factions contained members from a mix of economic classes.[iv] An explanation for this is that conflict requires financing from the rich and fighting from the poor. Greater inequality also decreases the opportunity cost for both sides. It costs the rich less to fund the conflict, while, in the absence of other opportunities for income, fighting becomes the best option for potential gains for the poor.
Real-world data supported this prediction, finding that civil wars between groups with greater levels of internal economic inequality have been more severe in terms of death tolls and the length of the conflict.[v] This is just one example, but recent work has begun to make more nuanced predictions.[vi]
Models of conflict move us beyond stories to explanations. They allow us to consider how various elements interact side by side, and they help researchers from different fields to operate under a shared understanding. Work in this direction has already been generating increasingly complex models of conflict, and this will continue in the future as models take further nuances into account. Models offer an exciting avenue for exploring new ideas and will be instrumental in informing our understanding of conflict dynamics.
[i] Obermeier, A.M. & Rustad, S.A. (2023) Conflict Trends: A Global Overview, 1946–2022. PRIO Paper. Oslo: PRIO.
[ii] https://acleddata.com/conflict-index/
[iii] Esteban, J., Morelli, M., Rohner, D.: Strategic mass killings. Journal of Political Economy 123(5), 1087–1132 (2015) https://doi.org/10.1086/682584
[iv] Esteban, J., Ray, D.: Conflict and distribution. Journal of Economic Theory 87(2), 379–415 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1006/jeth.1999.2549; Esteban, J., Ray, D.: On the salience of ethnic conflict. American Economic Review 98(5), 2185–2202 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.98.5.2185; Esteban, J., Ray, D.: A model of ethnic conflict. Journal of the European Economic Association 9(3), 496–521 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774. 2010.01016.x; Esteban, J., Ray, D.: Linking conflict to inequality and polarization. American Economic Review 101(4), 1345–1374 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.4.1345.
[v] Esteban, J., Mayoral, L., Ray, D.: Ethnicity and conflict: An empirical study. American Economic Review 102(4), 1310–1342 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.4.1310
[vi] Rusch, H. (2023). The logic of human intergroup conflict: Knowns and known unknowns. Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics. GSBE Research Memoranda No. 014 https://doi.org/10.26481/umagsb.2023014
