Cities, Conflict and State Fragility - Working Paper no. 85 - Cities and Fragile States

Cities have long been connected with processes of bureaucratisation and state building, as they have been to conflict and war. In bringing these two associations together Charles Tilly (1992) provided a useful analytical linchpin by famously highlighting the interaction between cities and war making as a critical factor in state making. He showed how in early modern Europe urban merchants struck bargains with medieval power brokers when agreeing to help fund wars aimed at extending or consolidating sovereignty. The intersection of cities, states and violent conflict remains significant today, although it manifests in different and more complex ways, particularly under conditions of state fragility. Cities have changed, states have changed and armed conflict itself has changed. Many cities in contemporary fragile states emerged as sites of colonial extraction. Urban elites today do not possess the same autonomy from states that provided the European urban merchant classes the bargaining power they were able to exercise historically. Further, in many developing countries state power holders tend to access capital from abroad rather than domestically, or fund their activities in ways that do not depend on taxation from cities. As taxation is generically a key component of state building, and as an urban tax base is generally considered critical, this uncoupling of taxation and the state-making enterprise constitutes a significant departure from the historical experience of mature economies. Lastly, and most pertinent to our argument is that conflict itself is changing. In this respect cities are increasingly critical locations and therefore crucial sites of political engagement and policy intervention. To understand these changes, we frame our discussion in relation to three forms of conflict and how they impact upon cities. In brief, sovereign conflict refers to situations where international actors are directly and explicitly involved in the war in question. Civil conflict refers to violent conflict between two or more organised groups one or more of which claims to represent part of the state itself. The struggle is for control of state institutions and/or territory within sovereign boundaries (though there may be outside intervention). Civic conflict refers to a broad array of conflict that tends to take place in cities. Our concern is not with constructive contestation but rather with destructive and violent manifestations of civic conflict including, for example, gang warfare, violent crime, terrorist acts, religious and sectarian riots, spontaneous rebellions and violent protests in response to perceived state failures. Civic conflict may spill beyond city boundaries but is associated with the distinctly urban quality of proximity to, and the visibility of, government. In sovereign conflicts cities – and capital cities in particular – are seen as particularly significant territory, so that ‘securing the city’ can become an overriding priority. This can persist during post-war ‘reconstruction’ processes, which often see international actors pour into cities where their involvement in decision making is often at the expense of local needs and actors, with implications for future civic conflict. Historically civil conflict has often 2 taken root in rural areas, meaning that even though cities are often the ‘prize’ to be won they can remain spaces of relative security during the war. Under these circumstances cities can become relatively autonomous, turning away from what is left of the state and seeking protection instead from other actors, including rebel groups, with important implications for state consolidation. Civic conflict is ultimately a reactive expression of grievance by urban populations vis-à-vis the state or other urban actors. It is important to note that it is not the fact that cities are inherently alienating that leads to civic conflict, but rather how power is structured in urban spaces. Our research suggests that civic conflict is on the rise, in relative if not absolute terms. This is linked in part to civil wars being in decline and being associated with urbanisation processes that sometimes result in civic conflict. Where civil conflicts spiral into civic ones, they become increasingly urban in character. External intervention in sovereign conflicts can also give rise to new conflicts – particularly in cities – even where the aim is ‘post-conflict’ reconstruction. Civil and sovereign conflicts can erode the state at city level, for example when cities that are struggling to cope with the impact of surrounding conflict become more dependent on financial transfers from the centre or where non-state actors become providers of urban services and compete with state institutions for legitimacy. Urban politics are critically important to the way social tensions and antagonisms are managed in cities. We identify four ways in which this occurs: i) manipulation of contestation into violent conflict; ii) deferral and/or suppression of contestation; iii) clientelist cooption of the aggrieved; and iv) fostering of generative engagement. Each of these has a distinct impact on state fragility through processes of state erosion, consolidation and transformation. The third and fourth of these approaches offer the best route for avoiding conflict in the medium and long term; but only the last is likely to allow for state transformation and dynamic development. Civic conflict can be positive and creative, but when violent and destructive it represents a significant contemporary threat to human security, state consolidation and development. Peace settlements and reconstruction processes brokered nationally need to take careful account of their impact on urban populations and the state at city level. ‘Post’-conflict urban stability cannot be taken for granted, especially in the context of state fragility, while reconstruction efforts can actually undermine the potential of cities to accommodate inclusive political coalitions that promote development and state transformation in the city and beyond.