CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 106Political Conflict and GovernancePeacebuilding and International SecurityMilitary and Defense Studies

Progovernment Militias

Open access
Carey, Sabine C., Mitchell, Neil J.·2017·Annual Review of Political Science
DOI 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051915-045433
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Sociologists, political scientists, and economists have long emphasized the benefits of monopolizing violence and the risks of failing to do so. Yet recent research on conflict, state failure, genocide, coups, and election violence suggests governments cannot or will not form a monopoly. Governments worldwide are more risk acceptant than anticipated. They give arms and authority to a variety of nonstate actors, militias, vigilantes, death squads, proxy forces, paramilitaries, and counterbalancing forces. We develop a typology based on the links of the militia to the government and to society as a device to capture variations among these groups. We use the typology to explore insights from this emerging literature on the causes, consequences, and puzzling survival of progovernment militias and their implications for security and human rights, as well as to generate open questions for further research.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-polisci-051915-045433

Cites

99 of 99 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Violence against civilians is often outsourced to pro-government militias.

    “Often, the violence is 'outsourced' to pro-government militias (Carey and Mitchell 2017).”

    From Dynamics and Logics of Civil War (2017) · cites this paper as Carey and Mitchell 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 101 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Carey, S. C., & Mitchell, N. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Mannheim (DE)
  • University College London (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Annual Review of Political Science
Publisher
Annual Reviews
Published
2017-05-11
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
127-147
ISSN
  • 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1577
DOI
10.1146/annurev-polisci-051915-045433
OpenAlex
W4229978044
Cited by
106
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4
FWCI
2.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Annual Review of Political Science (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • MADOC (University of Mannheim) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/E011756/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Political Conflict and Governance
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Peacebuilding and International Security
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Military and Defense Studies
Keywords
state monopoly of violence, state failure, vigilante, death squads, proxy forces, paramilitary groups, coups d'état, electoral violence, security, human rights

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review