Cooperation and Infighting
My dissertation investigates how competition over recruits influences cooperation and infighting among militant groups, how groups design their alliances, and how allies learn from each other. I have other ongoing solo- and co-authored projects examining different dimensions of inter-group cooperation and infighting.
*** Please do not cite my unpublished work without permission. Please contact me at ilaydaonder@tamu.edu for manuscripts.
Civilian Constituencies and Recruitment Pools: A Network Analysis of Militant Group Cooperation and Infighting
In preparation for submission
__________
Existing accounts suggest that shared civilian constituencies have both cooperation- and conflict-inducing effects on inter-group militant relations. I develop a theoretical framework to explain inter-group cooperation and infighting simultaneously. I propose a conceptual distinction between shared constituencies and competition over the social support bases that serve as militant recruitment pools. Drawing on theories of the social origins of armed actors, I hypothesize that competition over recruits moderates the impact of shared constituencies on inter-group relations. I test our expectations using social network analysis tools -TERGMs- on a novel database of 53 Northeast Indian militant groups between 1981-2021. I find that groups with shared constituencies are likely to cooperate if they can differentiate their recruitment pools, whereas those that rely on the same social networks for recruitment are likely to fight. My findings have vast implications for how scholars study competition in complex multiparty conflict environments.
Arms, Words, and Expertise: Disaggregating Different Forms of Militant Group Cooperation
In preparation for submission
__________
Cooperation among militant organizations may take several forms that extend beyond the conventional material and rhetorical categories. In this study, I propose a comprehensive 2×2 typology of militant group cooperation, integrating power redistributive consequences and interdependency effects as key dimensions. I classify different forms of cooperation such as rhetorical support, procurement of arms and funds, provision of training, intelligence, or logistical support, based on the extent to which they facilitate dyadic power redistribution and interdependency between allying parties. Using this typology, I derive several testable hypotheses and test them using social network analysis tools on new, disaggregated, time-series, directional network data on relationships between militant groups from 1981 to 2021. I find that (1) the main driver of cooperation types with major redistributive consequences is concerns over dyadic balance of power, whereas cooperation types with minor redistributive consequences ae predominantly motivated by ideational alignment, (2) cooperation types that induce high interdependency among allying parties are primarily driven by asymmetric tactical complementarity, and (3) only cooperation involving major redistributive consequences and high interdependency effects tends to create dense alliance clusters. My results contextualize and shed light on many of the contradictory findings in the literature. This study has vast implications for how scholars study cooperation among non-state actors as I underline the scholarly need for disaggregating different forms of cooperation to gain more fine-grained insights into how inter-group relations manifest in complex multiparty conflict environments.
Inter-Group Learning and Diffusion in Militant Alliances: Evidence from Kidnapping
In preparation for submission
__________
This paper investigates the learning processes in militant groups and how different alliances shape these processes. Challenging the conventional view that tactical diffusion is a straightforward outcome of alliances, I argue that alliances offering joint training are more effective in facilitating inter-group learning compared to those limited to arms, funds, or rhetorical support. This effectiveness stems from joint training enabling not only elite-level interactions but also socialization among fighters across groups, fostering shared norms, understandings, and practices. The study tests this theory using cross-sectional time series data on militant alliances among 53 militant groups in Northeast India between 1980-2021, focusing on their use of kidnapping tactics. The findings reveal that alliances involving joint training with groups proficient in kidnapping significantly increase the likelihood of a group adopting kidnapping, whereas alliances limited to arms, funds, or rhetorical support do not. Once kidnapping is adopted, its persistent use suggests that what is learned from allies becomes entrenched within the group’s practices, indicative of a contagion process where norms and practices are socially reinforced within a community. The results highlight how specific inter-group interactions can facilitate complex organizational learning, opening new research avenues into how militant groups learn about practices beyond violence, such as rebel governance, public relations, diplomacy, or transnational campaigning.
More Conflict Actors, More Violence? A Long-Standing Argument Revisited
Working Paper
__________
​
Pledging to Foreign Actors as a Shock to Local Conflicts (with Mark Berlin)
Research in Progress
__________
​
Rank‑and‑File Soldier Defections Across Rebel Organizations (with Finn Klebe)
Research in Progress
__________
​