Introduced by Devon E.A. Curtis and Gyda M. Sindre
Ideas and ideology play a central role in the rhetorical repertoire of non-state armed groups throughout their struggles. Often, ideas and ideologies serve strategic goals for armed groups during the conflict, such as recruitment, coordination and socialization of combatants and supporters, and they also signal a group’s normative commitments to internal and external audiences. Non-state armed groups express more or less coherent narratives about why they are fighting. These narratives typically involve claims against the state, often along with a vision of what kind of state might replace it, or what kind of state reforms they would like to implement.
What happens to these ideas and ideologies when former armed movements turn into political parties, either as ruling parties or as opposition parties? This question is timely. If there is a peace deal in Afghanistan, what might happen to the ideology motivating the Taliban? To what extent will the leftist ideas articulated by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) during the Colombian conflict remain relevant now that it has transformed into a political party and renamed itself as the Revolutionary Alternative Common Force? Why was the Sudan’s People’s Liberation Movement in South Sudan not able to sustain a common platform and ideological agenda after winning Independence and becoming the ruling party in 2011?
The articles in this Special Collection help us better understand the ideological trajectories of political parties that have their origins as non-state armed groups. Through single and comparative cases, the articles seek to understand the extent to which wartime ideas of the state persist, moderate, or are abandoned. The contributions highlight the great variation in ideological commitments among armed groups as well as variation in post-war ideological continuity or adaptation. In most cases, post-war governance practices and legitimation strategies remain at least partially informed by foundational ideologies, but this is not to say that ideology remains constant. To the contrary, the articles show how and why electoral logics, patrimonial logics and state-building logics may influence ideas in ‘peacetime’ politics.
It is easy to lament the fact that some armed movements that criticized structures of exclusion, injustice and exploitation in wartime do not maintain ideas and practices of inclusion, justice and fairness when they govern. It may also be disappointing to see that ‘hardliners’ who were expected to moderate their ideas to adapt to a new peacetime context do not always do so. The articles in this Special Collection take a nuanced view and argue that it is necessary to understand former rebels’ agendas and visions on their own terms, and the political environment within which former rebel parties are embedded, in order to assess what happens to these ideas over time. We hope that the articles contribute to a much larger, global debate.
We dedicate this Special Collection to the memory of one of the contributors, Ralph Sprenkels. His contribution in this collection, focusing on the FMLN in post-war El Salvador and its ideological innovation is exemplary in its meticulous field work and conceptual innovation. Yet Ralph’s contribution to this project goes far beyond his own article. His intellectual energy, his generosity of spirit, his commitment to social justice and his insightful comments and suggestions in the two workshops that led to this collection helped shape the project as a whole. He will be greatly missed, and the field is much richer as a result of his work.
November 2019
Follow Government & Opposition on BlueSky to stay up to date with the latest content from this important title.