Anastasia Shesterinina
“Disaggregating mid-level commander roles is the first step to understanding heterogeneity within this cohort and how this heterogeneity feeds into mid-level commanders’ divergent influence on peace”
The Civil War Paths project recently co-hosted an expert workshop with Réseau de recherche sur les opérations de paix at the University of Montreal titled ‘Mid-Level Commanders of Non-state Armed Groups as a Heterogenous Cohort: Beyond Spoilers v. Leaders of Peace’. Scholars, practitioners and former mid-level commanders of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia–People’s Army (FARC-EP) were invited to discuss an upcoming report on the conceptualisation of the mid-level commander cohort in non-state armed groups (NSAGs). The report builds on the co-authors’ publications on the processes of becoming and being mid-level commanders, insurgent adaptability and mediation in civil wars. It argues for the importance of addressing heterogeneity within this cohort to better account for mid-level commanders’ divergent trajectories, including their influence on peace. Here we highlight a number of overarching themes that emerged through this discussion.
Disaggregating mid-level commander roles
Individuals who become mid-level commanders in non-state armed organisations have diverse backgrounds, follow various paths into their organisations and into mid-level roles within these organisations and have wide-ranging experiences within these roles. They also move between these and other roles within their organisations. As a result, the ties, status and skills mid-level commanders develop vary. Disaggregating mid-level commander roles is the first step to understanding heterogeneity within this cohort and how this heterogeneity feeds into mid-level commanders’ divergent influence on peace.
Conceptualising mid-level commanders as connecting nodes within their organisations
In their roles, mid-level commanders engage with top leaders and rank-and-file members of their organisations as well as local communities and extra-organisational and extra-territorial actors in their areas of operation. As a result, they develop ‘multi-directional relations’ and act as connecting nodes within their organisations. This central position in their organisations enables mid-level commanders to exercise a degree of agency in their decision-making and day-to-day activities, which is unique to mid-level commanders of non-state armed groups as compared to conventional armed forces.
Specifying experiences that are particularly conducive to different post-war influences
However, the degree of agency that mid-level commanders exercise differs depending on the type and structure of the organisation, the specific position and nature of responsibilities that mid-level commanders have at any given time and the structural conditions in which they operate, including the relations they are able to develop in their roles. Hence, identifying the roles and structural conditions that afford mid-level commanders relative discretion in their decision-making and autonomy in their day-to-day activities can help specify those wartime experiences that are particularly conducive to their divergent influence on peace.
Identifying variation within and across different types of non-state armed organisations
This requires paying careful attention to variation in mid-level commander roles not only within but also across different types of non-state armed organisations. These organisations can be placed on a continuum from less to more centralised and diversified. Yet, whether hierarchical, network-based or hybrid, non-state armed organisations almost always have different levels of command and functionally differentiated units. Further research on how mid-level commander roles are defined, understood and practiced within different types of organisations is needed for a comparative approach to this cohort.
Departing from path-dependent models to understand mid-level commanders’ post-war agency
Existing research beyond Colombia emphasises the agency of former mid-level commanders of non-state armed groups in the post-war period. These actors do not fall into predetermined war-to-post-war trajectories but can utilise the multi-directional relations they develop during the war to act in entrepreneurial ways within their old and new networks after the war. This involves not only violent mobilisation but also various forms of local authority and leadership within ex-combatant communities that stem not only from mid-level commanders’ wartime ties, skills and status but also post-war security conditions and opportunities, which former mid-level commanders navigate through multi-directional relations they establish during and after the war.
Developing cautious yet comprehensive approaches to engaging mid-level commanders in light of their wartime agency
Because of wartime agency that mid-level commanders of non-state armed organisations enjoy to a different degree, engagement with mid-level commanders should be cautiously weighted against the potential that it can disincentivise top leaders who are the primary actors in negotiations from engaging in peace processes and even split armed organisations in this context. Any engagement requires an understanding of mid-level commanders’ different roles and relations within their organisations. Yet, such information is not always available and former mid-level commanders can fill this gap where possible. Beyond engagement, DDR programmes specific to mid-level commanders are key to addressing this cohort’s central wartime position in their organisations. Bringing mid-level commanders into peace processes based on their diverse experiences can create additional incentives for mid-level commanders to play an active role in peace efforts.
