The State Capacity Paradox: Post-Conflict Targeting and Long-Term Stability

Building on Kreiman's fascinating finding that states focus post-conflict capacity building on previously contested areas, I'm curious about an unexpected potential downside. What if this targeted approach creates "capacity islands" - areas with strong state presence surrounded by neglected regions? This could generate new grievances or make these targeted areas more attractive to rebels seeking resources. The research would use spatial analysis to examine whether areas that received intensive post-conflict capacity building (like the insurgent-controlled districts in Kreiman's Peru study) experience different conflict trajectories compared to other regions. This challenges the implicit assumption that more state capacity is always better, suggesting instead that the distribution and pattern of capacity building matters crucially for sustainable peace.

References:

1. The incursion of Leviathan: wartime territorial control and post-conflict state capacity in Peru. Guillermo Kreiman (2022). WIDER Working Paper.