The State’s Use of Force by Meredith Lauren Blank A dissertation submitted in partial fulllment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Political Science) in the University of Michigan 2017 Doctoral Committee: Professor Christian Davenport, Chair Associate Professor John David Ciorciari Professor James D. Morrow Assistant Professor Yuri Zhukov Meredith Lauren Blank [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0002-9340-2580 © Meredith Lauren Blank 2017 Dedication Finally, the time has come Everything up ’til yesterday was a prologue.1 To William Patterson, who always believed in me to run farther, climb higher and complete this doctorate. 1Radwimps. Kimi No Na wa, 2016. ii Acknowledgements Raising a family is dicult enough. Raising a Ph.D. can be just as involved. This dissertation would not have been possible without the incredible support from my advisors, parents, mentors, friends, colleagues and a number of academic organizations. I am deeply indebted to my committee who have guided me over the course of many conversations, classes and zip codes. I must start by thanking James Morrow, professor of WorldPolitics at the University of Michigan. Through all of this, from my rst course on international relations in undergraduate school to the completion of my dissertation, he taught and mentored me. He showed me how to be bold in intellectual pursuits and that the best work came from asking the hardest questions. I owe tremendous gratitude to Christian Davenport, who has been instrumental in shaping my research and way of thinking. Through his guidance and wisdom, he taught me to push the boundaries of our discipline. Yuri Zhukov and John Ciorciari provided expertise, ceaseless encouragement and showed great patience throughout the multiple drafts of this project, from its earliest incarnation to nal submission. Many mentors also provided guidance on this project during my time at University of Michigan. Allan Stam broadened my perspective of international aairs from merely considering current events to pursuing a wider understanding of history. Scott Tyson deserves special thanks for the countless hours he spent reading chapters, rereading chapters and never giving up on an idea. Rob Sayre provided me with as much advice as anyone; he gave valuable expertise on security aairs, military history and martinis. I’m grateful to Leanne Powner for showing me how to organize a seemingly chaotic writing process. I owe thanks to Mark Dincecco, Christopher Fariss, Mai Hassan, Ragnhild Nordås and Philip Potter for their comments and insight. I also wish to thank Robert Mickey, who has mentored and supported me since I was an undergraduate and throughout my doctoral training; it was Rob Mickey who informed me I had iii been accepted to Michigan’s graduate program, and for that I will always be thankful. I owe much thanks to my graduate student colleagues at University of Michigan, who I am lucky enough to also consider close friends. Isaac Jenkins, Thomas O’Mealia, Anita Ravishankar, Laura Seago, Jessica Sun, Alexander Von Hagen-Jamar and Alton Worthington provided guidance, encouragement and−as needed−housing. I’ve had the pleasure of calling both the University of Michigan and the George Washington University home. I want to extend my thanks to Charles Glaser and Stephen Biddle at the George Washington University Elliot School of International Aairs for providing me with the expertise, direction and resources to succeed. Elizabeth Saunders, Caitlin Talmadge, Alexander Downes, Yonatan Lupu and participants of the Research-in-Progress workshop at the Institute for Security and Conict Studies provided indispensable advice on multiple versions of this project. Ryan Baker deserves special thanks for his insights on military aairs; this dissertation is stronger because of the rich series of dialogues that occurred over many happy hours and half-priced beers. My data collection would not have been possible without institutional support from Rackham Graduate School at the University of Michigan, the Elliott School of International Aairs at the George Washington University, and the William A. and Shirley P. Yolles Graduate Fellowship for Research on Humanitarianism. Friends and family, too, contributed to this work, in ways they may not even realize. Ben VanWagoner and Sarah Waitz provided valuable editorial assistance with even the roughest drafts. Bill, Sue and Catherine Patterson along with Elizabeth Bacon, Marlene Tyner-Valencourt and Dorian Waitz gave unwavering support throughout the process. I would not have been able to stay positive throughout this journey without Remi. Being a dog, he showed me how to stay calm under pressure−and enjoy naps. I would not have made it through without the cooking of Ann Sayre, the wisdom of Karen Shen, the humor of Clare Tyson, or weekly climbs with Ethan and Wendy Zorick. I am indebted to Tedfor creating a Gibson original on my dissertation’s behalf−three parts rye, one part applejack, one part Campari. I, of course, have to give a special acknowledgment to my brother Jonathan Blank along with my parents Ira and Karen Blank. They instilled in me early the passion for arguing about politics. iv Everyone listed here helped me take this from a discussion at the dinner table to a dissertation, and is part of my family. Thanks for raising me. See you at family reunions. v Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii List of Figures viii List of Tables ix Abstract xi Chapter 1 Introduction to the state’s use of force1 1.1 Question and motivation................................ 1 1.2 Conceptualization of security and scope conditions................... 4 1.3 Internal security forces: Tradeos in cost and control.................. 7 1.4 Plan of the dissertation ................................. 12 Chapter 2 Internal security forces: Conceptual renements and a new dataset 17 2.1 Introduction....................................... 17 2.2 Current data limitations................................. 19 2.3 Data renements and coding rules............................ 21 2.4 Sources for data renements............................... 25 2.5 Potential measurement error .............................. 31 2.6 Comparison to other measures ............................. 34 2.7 Conclusion ....................................... 38 2.8 Dataset appendix .................................... 40 Chapter 3 Construction of coercion: Violence, the international system, and internal security 49 3.1 Introduction....................................... 49 3.2 Models of rivalry and state formation.......................... 52 3.3 Theory: Violence and the international system ..................... 59 3.4 Hypotheses and empirical strategy............................ 63 3.5 Empirical ndings.................................... 67 3.6 Conclusion ....................................... 79 Chapter 4 Dancing in the dark in civil conict: The state’s information environment and internal security 88 4.1 Introduction....................................... 88 4.2 The information environment in civil conict...................... 91 vi 4.3 Internal security as a response to information challenges ................ 95 4.4 Hypotheses on information challenges ......................... 104 4.5 Empirical strategy and data ............................... 107 4.6 Results.......................................... 112 4.7 Conclusion ....................................... 123 Chapter 5 Bringing the police back in: Internal state security and repression 133 5.1 Introduction....................................... 133 5.2 Conventional wisdom on state repression........................ 135 5.3 Theory: Centralization and repression in limited democracies . 139 5.4 Hypotheses ....................................... 145 5.5 Research Design..................................... 148 5.6 Results.......................................... 157 5.7 Conclusion ....................................... 171 5.8 Appendix ........................................ 174 Chapter 6 Conclusion: Democratizing domestic security 182 6.1 Summary ........................................ 182 6.2 Contributions...................................... 186 6.3 Directions for future research: Democratizing security . 188 Works Cited 190 vii List of Figures 2.1 Militias and gendarmerie organizations worldwide ..................... 30 2.2 Countries with militaries, militias and gendarmeries..................... 31 2.3 Country years with militias and gendarmeries by regime type................ 32 2.4 Countries with internal security forces............................ 35 2.5 Countries with regulated militias .............................. 37 2.6 Countries with unregulated militias............................. 37 3.1 Security organizations in new states, according to non-violent and violent independence (1950-2010).......................................... 69 3.2 Security organizations in new states, according to geographic region (1950-2010) . 70 3.3 Predicted probabilities, security organizations in newly formed countries (1950-2010) . 74 3.4 Kaplan-Meier survival estimates: Gendarmerie creation................... 77 3.5 Kaplan-Meier survival estimates: Militia creation...................... 77 3.6 Kaplan-Meier survival estimates: Military creation ..................... 78 3.7 Kaplan-Meier survival estimates: Former power with gendarmeries, militias......... 85 3.8 Gendarmerie creation.................................... 85 3.9 Militia creation ....................................... 85 3.10 Average