The World Bank is usually involved in issues of international development. Why should it be interested in civil war?
This document introduces a Policy Research Report from the World Bank on the relationships between civil war and development, citing two reasons for turning international attention to civil wars. Firstly, the consequences of civil war can be seen as ‘development in reverse’, undoing the gains of past development and frustrating current efforts. Secondly, civil war is often associated with low development – the risk of conflict is much higher in low-income than in middle-income countries.
- Those who start civil wars rarely suffer the consequences – the victims are mostly civilians, often children and those outside the country itself; the international community therefore has a legitimate role as advocate for these victims.
- The World Bank’s central purpose of alleviating poverty is particularly bound up with conflict as both cause and consequence of underdevelopment.
- Development is an effective means of conflict prevention; the full report outlines practical measures to work towards this goal, both by the World Bank and by other international actors.
- The report aims to raise awareness outside the World Bank, as collective action by other actors will be needed, especially by the Group of Eight.
- The introduction to the report also provides information about the full report’s other authors and collaborating institutions.
The report lists main findings on the extent of the damage done by civil wars, how much particular countries are at risk of conflict, and actions which could be taken by the international community to prevent or mitigate conflict.
- The damage done by civil wars extends beyond the immediate violence: non-combatants and neighbouring countries are often affected in terms of income, disease and displacement.
- Civil wars can also lead to the creation of territories outside the effective control of any government, which may become epicentres of crime and disease on a global scale.
- Two kinds of country are at particular risk of civil war. One is marginalized countries who have failed to escape a low-income dependence on primary commodities. Even historically peaceful countries risk conflict in the face of persistent poverty, as Côte d’Ivoire and Nepal show.
- The second group consists of countries caught in a ‘conflict trap’: past conflicts leave a legacy of instability and violence which render them highly likely to relapse into fresh conflict.
- International actions could reduce the incentives for civil war over natural resources: the Kimberley process aims to avoid funding rebels through ‘conflict diamonds’ for example; the Global Witness transparency initiative on natural resource revenues is another example.
- Measures taken by the international community to cushion primary commodity exporters against price shocks would help to avoid the severe economic consequences which can trigger conflicts; no such mechanisms currently exist.
