User:Jp-columbia/sandbox

Review of Warlords and Coalition Politics in Post-Soviet States (4/16/2016)
My first impression was that the book wasn’t a great fit for our comparative politics course because Driscoll’s analysis was framed from an IR perspective with a significant reliance on game theory. Initially, I also found myself questioning whether the unique post-Soviet era case studies might be so expressly tied to the historical relationships of Georgia and Tajikistan with the USSR that the social science would not be applicable elsewhere, and this extended to the considerations of international interventions where the outcomes of such interventions were skewed in this case by the nefarious intentions of the Russian interventions. But then, I began to realize the value of considering path dependence, institutional remnants of the Soviet era, and preexisting political economic power networks as having analogous links to post-colonial states elsewhere and appreciated the value.

What’s most valuable about this reading is the empirical data concerning the study of “militia coalition politics” that emerged within the state of anarchy that existed in the post Soviet era involving “…coalition building, side-switching, ambiguity of alliances – which ultimately led to ‘order producing equilibrium’.”

As our seminar is focused on political order, it is useful to consider how these two nationas followed a very different path to state building than that which is prescribed by liberal Western political scientists, and the failures of Western interventions (primarily via foreign aid schemes) to avoid exploitation by warlords with the end result being that the aid becomes a source of “rent” for bargaining. The minutiae of the formal and informal bargaining, or “redistribution politics,” in such matters as land reform/property ownership and transfers, privatization in non-transparent closed-bid settings, complex credit swaps cemented via marriages, money laundering, price fixing schemes, and, most important of all, systemic bribery, is essential reading.

One of my favorite lines of the first chapter was about how the warlords colluded to create a state, yet after a decade, “the rulers installed at gunpoint by warlords had managed to wrest control of the state apparatus from the armed groups … faith in permanence of the state was returned … and ceasefires calcified into armistice across Eurasia.”


 * The book chronicles the corruption, patronage, clientelism, and threat of violence inherent in warlord politics, with examples of the “stationary bandit” model;
 * it dispels the incorrect notions of warlord incentivism concomitance to ethnic nationalism;
 * it offers a study of political violence and political order in observing how warlords and their militias use rational choice and utility to bargain and determine whether to join the warlord coalition in league with the state apparatus, or remain outside the coalition as rebel warlords;
 * it presents a valuable insight into the transformation of real power within these states from warlords, in general, to the central government as revenue from the rents extracted by coalition warlords is directed to the state and warlords are incorporated more formally into the official state apparatus;
 * it provides an understanding of how political power is consolidated by the regime and its “legitimized” warlord coalition through the systematic targeting of rebel warlords – with incentives for them to incorporate, by creating commitment problems, through strategies aimed at fomenting desertions of rebel army members and side-switching by higher-level militia leaders/officers (the state provides “exit options”)

The Philippines example (Dr. Ariel Hernandez):
While warlords are commonly viewed as regional leaders who threaten the sovereignty of a state, there are a number of states where the central government functions in collusion with warlords to achieve its goal of exercising its sovereignty over regions that would otherwise fall outside its control. In such decentralized states, particularly those where armed groups challenge national sovereignty, warlords can serve as useful allies of a central government that is unable to establish a monopoly over the use of force within its national territory. As political scientist Dr. Ariel Hernandez documented, one example is the Philippines, where successive presidential administrations – at least since Fernando Marcos secured power in 1965 – have “franchised violence to regional warlords” to counter the inroads of communist insurgents, Islamic rebels, and organized criminal gangs. This has led to the formation of at least 93 “Partisan Armed Groups,” armed militias loyal to regional warlords who, in exchange for their loyalty and willingness to use their private armies to quell the threats from these opposition groups, are granted a degree of autonomy within designated regions, the exclusive right to use violence, and the right “to profit from the ‘economy of violence’ that they establish in their own areas.”

Definition
Definition of Warlord should be expanded

Description
Subheading “Description” needs to be significantly developed. The definition/description is weak and contains no references or citations. The refutation of relationship between warlords and feudal authority is incorrect as there are political science essays that describe the feudal role of landed noble class as de facto warlords [I need to locate these sources]. The purported origin of the term warlord from Chinese and its adaptation by Germans needs to be researched/verified – and seems inaccurate. The direction of the “Description” section is random and disorganized. The description most certainly requires an illustration of the political and economic systems inherent within warlord-dominated territories. This will also require an expansion into the political hierarchy, the realms of warlord-warlord and warlord-society relationships, methods of ensuring loyalty, use of force, how social services are delivered, and revenue extraction.

Modern Usage
It appears that someone with at least rudimentary knowledge of academic writing took a stab at the “Modern Usage” subheading, citing failed states and clientelism, and even cites Mukhopadhyay, but it is open for more development with social science and citation. The list of examples can also be expanded – although I’m not sure if that’s necessary).

List of countries, regions, or empires
From this point, the article focuses on several countries: Afghanistan, China, Korea, Vietnam, and Mongolia; it also has subheadings for Europe and another labeled, “Russian Civil War and Chechen conflicts.” These subheadings – five countries, one region, and the odd attempt to consolidate several hundred years of Russian history into one paragraph, are indiscriminate and haphazard.

The subheading on Afghanistan, which I wrote, is fairly developed, but requires a great deal of expansion and analysis to be considered well-developed and I would will continue on this development. While I referenced Mukhopadhyay already, there is more from that work that is relevant, but I am also researching contrasting views. It should be noted that 18 of the 21 citations generated thus far in conjunction with this “Warlord” article are connected to the subheading on Afghanistan, demonstrating the overall weakness of the page.

The subheadings for China, Korea, Vietnam, and Mongolia contain brief references to some historical event where the term warlord applies, then lists names, dynasties, and kingdoms, without tying these to the warlord topic. There are no citations for these subheadings and no political science references. Likewise, there are neither citations nor political science references in the “Europe” and “Russian Civil War and Chechen conflicts” subheadings, and they are problematic in many ways.

Additional suggestions to improve article
I suggest that the article be first broken down into broad regions, such as continents. Each continent should then be broken down into subheadings, using a chronologically accurate historical perspective to identify sub-regions, which may include pre-state territories, kingdoms, colonies, and, ultimately, modern nation-states. Each sub-section should include historical perspective, political development, and social science analysis to illustrate.

Inexplicably, this article is completely devoid of any references to Africa. As is evident from readings related to post-colonial Africa, the application of the term warlord to describe the political and economic paradigm in governance is germane and necessary to be explored. Similarly, instability in Latin America, particularly in Central America, has given rise to clientelist political and economic arrangements where regional warlords emerged to exert significant power and influence over the policy decisions of central governments. Much of the research and analysis for this article will hone in on the development of warlord dominated societies in Africa and Latin America.

List of readings/references to consider (incomplete)

 * Building a Theory of Strongman Governance in Afghanistan (Dipali Mukhopadhyay)
 * Disguised warlordism and combatanthood in Balkh: the persistence of informal power in the formal Afghan state (Dipali Mukhopadhyay)
 * Comparative Politics, Chapter 2: The State (David J. Samuels)
 * Humanitarian Relief and Civil Conflict (Max Blouin and Stephane Pallange)
 * On the Origin of States: Stationary Bandits and Taxation in Eastern Congo (Raúl Sánchez de la Sierra)
 * On thugs and heroes: Why warlords victimize their own civilians (Jean-Paul Azam)
 * Violence and the Rise of Open-Access Orders (Douglass C. North, John Joseph Wallis, and Barry R. Weingast)
 * Violent Conflicts and Governance Challenges in West Africa: the case of the Mano River basin area (Amos Sawyer)
 * War Making and State Making as Organized Crime (Charles Tilly)
 * Warlord Politics and African States (William Reno)
 * Warlords, Politicians and the Post-First Civil War Election in Liberia (George Klay Kieh, Jr.)
 * Warlords: Strong-arm Brokers in Weak States (Kimberly Marten)

Research directions, concepts, strategies, topics

 * Failed states
 * Warlord politics
 * Warlord economics
 * Warlord society
 * Differentiating between warlords and violent bands
 * Rent/Tax revenue/extraction of resources/labor
 * Hyper-federalism
 * Corruption
 * Benevolent Autocrats
 * Cross-reference reference readings in Google Scholar
 * Conflict minerals/ Blood Diamonds

People/groups to research

 * Charles Taylor (Liberia/Cote d’Ivoire/Sierra Leone)
 * Samuel Doe (Liberia)
 * Joseph Kony (Lord’s Resistance Army)
 * Foday Sankoh (Sierra Leone/ Revolutionary United Front)
 * Roosevelt Johnson (Liberia)
 * Thomas Lubanga (Congo)
 * Bosco Ntaganda (Rwanda/Congo)
 * Patriotic Front for the Liberation of Congo
 * Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe)
 * Idi Amin (Uganda)
 * Muammar Gadhafi (Libya)

Continue my work on the entry for "Warlord" page

 * This page is relatively weak on social science contributions and lacks adequate references to political scientists, economists, and other academics.
 * Page is graded “C-Class” on Wiki’s quality assessment scale.
 * While I have worked on the subheading entitled "Afghanistan," there can be more substance on that topic to reflect the political situation of warlord governance in that nation.
 * Notably absent from this page are references to Africa, where there are a number of nations where warlords play a significant role in the political apparatus, violence, and order. This is a region where much of our work focuses, and I would be able to craft subheadings on several African nations that would include social science theory and analysis
 * The page appears to be a good candidate for additions and improvements stemming from the body of works we are reading and analyzing in this course.
 * My original inspiration for work on this page was our class reading from Dipall Mukhopadhyay (Building a Theory of Strongman Governance in Afghanistan)
 * Link to page: Warlord

Next steps:

 * Select an article to work on, removing the rest from your user page. Add your topic on the course page. Remember this should not be the identical topic as one of your other term papers or senior essay.


 * Spend some time looking around Wikipedia for articles related to your topic, whether they are broader or have parallels. How is the information organized? How should your article fit in? Are you sure you are editing in the right place, or addressing the topic in the right way?
 * Compile a bibliography of relevant, reliable sources and post it to the talk page of the article you are working on. Begin reading the sources. Make sure to check in on the talk page (or watchlist) to see if anyone has advice on your bibliography.

Suggestions from Professor Blattman:

 * Link concept of warlords to more usual forms of political organization, such as limited access orders. See the North Wallis Weingast reading.
 * Look for books on warlord politics. William Reno’s book comes to mind for Africa. I think it may link into the NWW frame.
 * In general, “normalizing” the idea of warlord politics (in that it’s a fairly common political form) and (if it makes sense) differentiating it from other forms of limited access orders might make sense

Proposal #1: Work on entry for "Jewish Religious Terrorism"

 * This page is extremely weak on social science contributions and lacks adequate references to political science, economics, or other academic fields
 * The page "Jewish Terrorism" redirects to this page
 * Page quality is poor. The revision history is limited (one revision in February; five in January). The page is cited for containing original research, false information, and content that may be in dispute.
 * Although the subject is controversial, I am certain that I can provide an objective, nonpartisan perspective using political science theory and my unbiased approach should be respected by various interested parties.
 * I believe this subject is an excellent candidate for our work in attempting to gain understanding and insight into political violence and order, particularly within contested territories.
 * During my research, I also identified a page on "Zionist Political Violence," which is also a weak page. It is limited to historical references to the terrorist campaign carried out by the Zionist organizations against British and Palestinian Arabs in the era leading up to Israeli independence in 1948. It may be necessary, or at least appropriate, to cross reference and add my newer research to this page, as well.
 * My interest in this topic was initiated with recent news coverage of acts of terrorism carried out by Jewish Israelis against Palestinians, particularly those carried out by residents of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. My research led me to interesting coverage in Foreign Affairs entitled, “Playing With Fire: The Rise of Jewish Terrorism” by Mitch Ginsburg.
 * There is a wealth of social science relevant to this subject, and the work of Virginia Page Fortna comes to mind.

Proposal #2: Continue my work on the entry for "Warlord"

 * This page is relatively weak on social science contributions and lacks adequate references to political scientists, economists, and other academics.
 * Page is graded “C-Class” on Wiki’s quality assessment scale.
 * While I have worked on the subheading entitled "Afghanistan," there can be more substance on that topic to reflect the political situation of warlord governance in that nation.
 * Notably absent from this page are references to Africa, where there are a number of nations where warlords play a significant role in the political apparatus, violence, and order. This is a region where much of our work focuses, and I would be able to craft subheadings on several African nations that would include social science theory and analysis
 * The page appears to be a good candidate for additions and improvements stemming from the body of works we are reading and analyzing in this course.
 * My original inspiration for work on this page was our class reading from Dipall Mukhopadhyay (Building a Theory of Strongman Governance in Afghanistan)

Proposal #3: Ethnic nationalist conflict in the former Yugoslavia

 * There are three separate pages where the issue is either mentioned or should be mentioned: Yugoslavia, Yugoslav Wars, and The Breakup of Yugoslavia; and there are individual pages looking at particular relevant ethnic nationalist movements that were most relevant to the conflicts: Serbian Nationalism. Bosnian Nationalism, and Croatian Nationalism.
 * None of these pages adequately consider political science theory or explanations for the rise of nationalism and the conflict; and the pages have few references to social scientists or academics.
 * All of these pages construct their explanation of the conflicts based purely on historical record and contemporary news reporting.
 * There is considerable work in political science on nationalism – its origins, when and how it may/may not develop into conflict
 * Of particular relevance are analyses on the subject of ethnic nationalist conflict from the perspective of rational theory (James Fearon’s “Rationalist Explanations for War” is germane; Charles Tilly’s “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime” could be explored and tied to this subject).
 * My inspiration for this work is Barry Posen’s “The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict.”

Proposal #4: Continue and expand my work on the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia - Ejercito del Pueblo (FARC)

 * While this page is well developed, it lacks substantial political theory and analysis
 * The page does not examine political governance within the territories it occupies
 * The page does no adequately explore the conflict from a social science perspective (as with the Yugoslavia proposal above, it would be beneficial to consider James Fearon’s “Rationalist Explanations for War” is germane; Charles Tilly’s “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime,” and Barry Posen’s “The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict.”
 * It seems like much of what we have covered in class, as well as what we shall be covering (according to the syllabus) could be connected to this topic

SANDBOX PRACTICE
This is my Sandbox page for learning and practicing edits

It's good to be bold on Wikipedia.

In general, it's good to be bold

As done above through the Edit tab, I can also work manually through the Edit source tab to create the same bold Wikilink bold

According to the Wiki Education training video on citations, Wikipedia guidelines indicate that it is important to be bold.

Heading
This is a practice attempt to create a heading

SubHeading
Establishing a subheading now

Subheading 2
Testing the additional subheadings

= PAGE TITLE = This is what the Page Title should look like