Massey Documents by Type

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/294

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.Civil war

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The evolution of public administration and conflict in a post-conflict state : history’s role in Fiji’s political trajectory : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management at Massey University, Albany, New Zealand
    (Massey University, 2024-04-16) Loga, Patricia Savukiono-I-Tuikabara
    Violent geo-political conflicts are on the rise across the globe and most of the countries that experience these conflicts are developing nations like Fiji (Fund for Peace, 2022). Countries that are prone to conflict are classified as fragile States. In the aftermath of a conflict, the public sector is under immense pressure to restabilise the nation and normalise service provision to citizens. Understanding the behaviour of conflict and public administration in a post-conflict State is key for nation rebuilding because it gives an insight into the levers and impediments for crisis management. Although studies have explored crisis management in post-conflict States (Kaplan, 2008), little is known about the role that historical institutions play in the evolution and continuity of conflict and public administration. To address this gap, this thesis used the path dependency theory to explain how policy actions and decisions established a continuous cycle of conflict. Using institutionalism and resilience, this research described why public administration remained fragile despite showing signs of evolution in Fiji’s political trajectory. Based on the findings, it is suggested that policy actors in Fiji consider the following embedded ideologies in their policy making process: race-based politics, intertwined traditional and political roles, adversarial approaches to the protection of interests and segmented economic structures. Fiji is locked into a path of conflict and resilience is restrained by institutionalised processes; an understanding of historical structures that hinder progress can help policy actors create effective public policies. The first significant finding argued that conflict is pathdependent because Fiji was subjected to indirect rule when it was under colonial rule and that the short time taken for the nation to transition from a colony to an independent State created a lack of readiness for self-government. Public administration stability in Fiji was hindered by the co-existence of institutionalism and resilience. It was found that resilience thinking was stifled by institutionalised ideologies that had become embedded in the public administration system. This research made two key contributions: developed a theoretical understanding of public administration and conflict using the path-dependency, institutionalism, and resilience theories. The lessons learned to contribute to policy knowledge on crisis management and nation rebuilding in developing countries like Fiji. This research was conducted using archival research, which was collected from Archives New Zealand and the National Archives of Fiji. Archival research and document analysis complemented the path-dependency, institutionalism, and resilience theories, which involve a descriptive analysis of how past policy decisions affect the behaviour of institutions. In total, 3,270 documents from the years 1858 to 1992 were retrieved and analysed via document analysis and theoretical thematic analysis. Using archival research to study Fiji’s political history aided the identification of themes that explained how and when conflict became path dependent, and why public administration institutions were fragile. The findings from this thesis are contextual and Fiji is a small island developing State so it would be difficult to generalise or replicate. To add to the knowledge of conflict analysis, and nation rebuilding, future research could explore other post-conflict States or former colonies to find out if conflict is path-dependent and which factors create fragility in a public administration. The co-existence of institutionalism and resilience also has room for further development. There is an opportunity to explore the behaviour of these two theoretical frameworks in public administration. A deeper understanding of the push and pull effects of institutionalism and resilience has the potential to improve public sector reform and policy transfer processes.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A view from Chechnya : an assessment of Russian counterinsurgency during the two Chechen wars and future implications : a thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts in Defence and Strategic Studies at Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
    (Massey University, 2010) Renaud, Sean
    Following the 11 September 2001 attacks, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the myriad of smaller engagements taking place around the world in conjunction with the global war on terrorism, military academia has increasingly focused study on historical counter-insurgencies. The study of historical counter-insurgency has been very beneficial to the conduct of contemporary counter-insurgency operations. Although lessons can be learned from historical study, any conclusions tend to be subjective and are time, space and country specific. Notwithstanding this, historical case studies of counter-insurgency operations reveal a number of consistent themes. These themes include: the recommended approaches towards the conduct of information, security, hearts and minds, and reconstruction operations, the use of allied indigenous forces, the importance of unity of effort between the various counter-insurgent forces, the correct use of air power, the manipulation of the media, the proper training of counter-insurgent forces, logistics operations, and the importance of morale during counter-insurgencies. In the last two decades Russia has fought two counter-insurgency conflicts in Chechnya. The First Chechen War (1994-1996) was conducted by an underprepared, poorly coordinated Russian military. The First Chechen War was a disaster for the Russians because they simply had no road map for their ultimate objective of returning Chechnya to the Russian Federation. As a result, the Russians were severely mauled by the committed Chechen ‘warrior patriots’ and were forced to withdraw in 1996. Following this war, the Russian military began examining lessons from the first war and other counter-insurgencies with an eye to re-invading Chechnya. When that invasion commenced in 1999, the Russian forces were better prepared and more successful. They saturated the tiny republic with enormous firepower and manpower which made it difficult for the Chechen insurgents to manoeuvre. Although the war lingers on today, the Russians had control over the majority of the country within a year. Despite this victory, the Russian campaign was flawed; and its conduct has major implications for the future of Russian counter-insurgency operations. While heavy quantities of firepower and manpower were able to put down the insurgency in Chechnya, it is questionable whether Russian firepower and manpower would be successful in putting down an insurgency in a larger country with a larger population.