Replication Data for: Causal pathways of rebel defection from negotiated settlements: A theory of strategic alliances

While it is widely accepted that negotiated settlements are prone to breakdown, our understanding of the processes through which signatories defect lacks precision. A growing qualitative literature recognizes the potential for rebel group fluidity, yet the conflict field’s converging reliance on dyadic data obscures pathways of defection that result in splintering or merger in quantitative studies. An in-depth case study of a failed peace process in Uganda—which is misclassified in the extant data—helps to illustrate the ways in which excluded groups can lower the opportunity cost of defection for splintering factions, resulting in a strategic alliance. I test the generalizability of this argument against the full sample of rebel parties to settlements in Sub-Saharan Africa (1975–2015) using a large-N qualitative analysis of causal process observations (CPOs). The aggregated results provide strong evidence that the defection-by-alliance pathway is much more prevalent than previously recognized, accounting for more than one-third of all defections in the sample. Where settlements create shared incentives for stakeholders inside and outside the peace process to spoil, rebel elites appear more willing to bear the costs of an alliance with a rival, rather than surrendering under adverse conditions.

尽管学界已普遍认同谈判达成的和解协议易于破裂，但我们对缔约方叛离的具体作用机制仍缺乏精准认知。日益增多的定性研究文献已意识到叛乱团体具有流动性特征，但冲突研究领域日益趋同的二元数据依赖路径，却使得定量研究中无法清晰识别出引发团体分裂或合并的叛离路径。本研究以乌干达一场在现有公开数据中被错误分类的失败和平进程为深度案例，阐释了被排除在和平进程之外的群体，可通过降低分裂派系的叛离机会成本，催生战略联盟的具体路径。随后，本文基于1975年至2015年撒哈拉以南非洲地区所有签署和解协议的叛乱党派全样本，通过对因果过程观察值（CPOs）的大样本定性分析，检验了该论点的可推广性。汇总分析结果提供了强有力的实证证据，表明通过联盟实现叛离的路径远比此前学界认知更为普遍，占样本中全部叛离事件的三分之一以上。当和解协议为和平进程内外的利益相关方创造了破坏和平进程的共同动机时，叛乱精英似乎更愿意承担与对立派系结成联盟的成本，而非在不利条件下选择投降。