A Strategic Logic of Attacking Aid Workers: Evidence from Violence in Afghanistan

Why do armed groups ever direct violent attacks against humanitarian organizations? While scholars have analyzed wartime violence against civilians, little research exists on violence against other noncombatants, like humanitarian organizations. Violence against aid workers, however, is common in wartime, with devastating consequences for civilians, who suffer when aid organizations respond by reducing services. This article argues that much of the violence against humanitarian organizations is strategic. By serving as substitute providers of public goods, aid organizations can bolster the government. Insurgents thus target aid workers in an effort to force them out of particular regions, undermining government support. To test this argument, we analyze variation in violence across space and time using an original panel dataset on attacks against aid workers in Afghanistan, 2008–2012. Despite aid organizations’ attempts to remain neutral, we find evidence that insurgents strategically target aid workers in areas where their services likely strengthen government support.

为何武装团体总会针对人道主义组织实施暴力袭击？尽管学者们已针对战时针对平民的暴力行为展开分析，但针对人道主义组织这类非战斗人员目标的暴力研究仍极为匮乏。然而，针对救援人员的暴力行为在战时屡见不鲜，且会给平民带来灾难性后果——当人道主义组织因遭受袭扰而缩减服务供给时，平民的处境会进一步恶化。本文提出，针对人道主义组织的多数暴力行为均带有战略意图。人道主义组织作为公共物品的替代性供给方，能够强化政府的执政基础，因此反叛武装会以救援人员为目标，迫使他们撤离特定区域，以此削弱政府的支持度。为验证这一论点，我们使用2008至2012年阿富汗境内针对救援人员袭击事件的原创面板数据集，分析了暴力行为在时空维度上的分布差异。尽管人道主义组织试图保持中立立场，但我们的研究结果显示，在其服务能够有效强化政府支持度的区域，反叛武装确实会针对性地袭击救援人员。