Objective
As the frequency of interstate wars is decreasing and violent non-state actors’ challenge to states is becoming more common, the subject of counterinsurgency is increasing in prominence for scholars and policy makers both in Europe and in other parts of the world. Especially the current counterinsurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as increasing references to Al Qaeda as a global insurgency have contributed to the growing importance of counterinsurgency.
This research asks the question why sometimes battlefield success against the insurgents leads to an overall success in counterinsurgency and brings an end to the internal conflict, while other times it fails to achieve this outcome. Although states tend to resort to coercive (i.e. military) methods in order to eliminate insurgencies, these methods, in fact, have a mixed record of success. Even when states seem to inflict significant damage on the insurgents militarily, this does not necessarily bring an overall success in counterinsurgency.
In light of a comparative case study of Turkey and Peru and the analysis of a number of additional cases, this research aims to identify ways in which states can most effectively deal with insurgent organizations and end conflict and violence within their borders. It proposes that in order to eliminate an insurgency, it is more important to find the best method that directly responds to the characteristics, goals, and external connections of the particular insurgent organization challenging the state than to focus on various military, economic, social, and cultural methods based on their generic advantages and disadvantages.
Fields of science (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
CORDIS classifies projects with EuroSciVoc, a multilingual taxonomy of fields of science, through a semi-automatic process based on NLP techniques. See: The European Science Vocabulary.
This project has not yet been classified with EuroSciVoc.
Be the first one to suggest relevant scientific fields and help us improve our classification service
You need to log in or register to use this function
Programme(s)
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Multi-annual funding programmes that define the EU’s priorities for research and innovation.
Topic(s)
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Calls for proposals are divided into topics. A topic defines a specific subject or area for which applicants can submit proposals. The description of a topic comprises its specific scope and the expected impact of the funded project.
Call for proposal
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
Procedure for inviting applicants to submit project proposals, with the aim of receiving EU funding.
FP7-PEOPLE-2010-RG
See other projects for this call
Funding Scheme
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Funding scheme (or “Type of Action”) inside a programme with common features. It specifies: the scope of what is funded; the reimbursement rate; specific evaluation criteria to qualify for funding; and the use of simplified forms of costs like lump sums.
Coordinator
34980 SILE ISTANBUL
Türkiye
The total costs incurred by this organisation to participate in the project, including direct and indirect costs. This amount is a subset of the overall project budget.