Under what conditions can militias enhance governance in post-conflict settings? Drawing on nine months of fieldwork in rural Peru, this paper develops a theoretical framework to explain militias’ varied post-civil war trajectories, focusing on their wartime relationships with the military and local communities. I argue that militias with autonomy from the military and strong community ties are more likely to persist and strengthen post-war rural governance. By protecting communities from civil war violence, these militias earn social legitimacy and become institutionalized, prompting their members and local villagers to repurpose them for post-conflict governance roles—an overlooked yet essential trajectory for militias in post-conflict settings. To substantiate my argument, I conduct a comparative historical analysis in Peru’s rural periphery using multiple site-intensive methods, including interviews, archival work, and participant observation. The paper offers insights into the historical legacies of violence, institutional change, and governance in areas with minimal state presence.
AcemogluD.RobinsonJ. A.SantosR. J. (2013). The monopoly of violence: Evidence from Colombia. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(suppl_1), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1542-4774.2012.01099.x
2.
AhramA. I. (2011). Proxy warriors: The rise and fall of state-sponsored militias. Stanford University Press.
3.
AliyevH. (2019). When and how do militias disband? Global patterns of pro-government militia demobilization in civil wars. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 42(8), 715–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610x.2018.1425112
4.
Amnesty International. (2006). Sudan Government’s solution: Janjaweed unleashed in Darfur. AI Index, AFR 54/078/2006. November 24.
5.
AsensioR. (2019). El giro rural de la política andina: economía moral y políticas campesinas en Quispicanchi (Cusco). In En PortocarreroF.VergaraA. P. (Eds.), Aproximaciones al de Hoy Perú desde las Ciencias Sociales. Universidad del Pacífico.
6.
AuerbachA. M. (2018). Informal archives: Historical narratives and the preservation of paper in India’s urban slums. Studies in Comparative International Development, 53(3), 343–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-018-9270-5
7.
BalcellsL. (2012). The consequences of victimization on political identities: Evidence from Spain. Politics & Society, 40(3), 311–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329211424721
8.
BaldwinK. (2016). The paradox of traditional chiefs in democratic Africa. Cambridge University Press.
9.
BatesonR. (2017). The socialization of civilians and militia members: Evidence from Guatemala. Journal of Peace Research, 54(5), 634–647. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343317721812
10.
BatesonR. A. (2013). Order and violence in postwar Guatemala. Yale University.
11.
BeachD.PedersenR. B. (2019). Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines. University of Michigan Press.
12.
BiddleS. (2008). Review of the New US Army/Marine corps counterinsurgency field manual. Perspectives on Politics, 6(2), 347–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592708081164
13.
BlattmanC. (2009). From violence to voting: War and political participation in Uganda. American Political Science Review, 103(2), 231–247. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1352325209090211
14.
BlattmanC.MiguelE. (2010). Civil war. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 3–57.
15.
BlocqD. S. (2014). The grassroots nature of counterinsurgent tribal militia formation: The case of the fertit in southern Sudan, 1985–1989. Journal of Eastern African Studies, 8(4), 710–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/17531055.2014.946336
16.
BolteB.JooM. M.MukherjeeB. (2021). Security consolidation in the aftermath of civil war: Explaining the fates of victorious militias. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 65(9), 1459–1488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002721995528
17.
BoyerW. W. (1990). Political science and the 21st century: From government to governance. PS: Political Science & Politics, 23(1), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/419778
18.
CammettM.MacLeanL. M. (Eds.), (2014). The politics of non-state social welfare. Cornell University Press.
19.
CannJ. P. (1997). Counterinsurgency in Africa: The Portuguese way of war, 1961-1974. Greenwood Press.
20.
CareyS. C.ColaresiM. P.MitchellN. J. (2015). Governments, informal links to militias, and accountability. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(5), 850–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715576747
21.
CareyS. C.GonzálezB. (2021). The legacy of war: The effect of militias on postwar repression. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 38(3), 247–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0738894219899006
CareyS. C.MitchellN. J. (2021). Pro-government militias database version 2.1 codebook.
24.
Caretas (1982-1988). Political magazine accessed at the cultural center Casa Matteo Ricci, Ayacucho, Peru.
25.
CareyS. C.MitchellN. J.LoweW. (2013). States, the security sector, and the monopoly of violence: A new database on pro-government militias. Journal of Peace Research, 50(2), 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343312464881
26.
ChenS.LoayzaN.Reynal-QuerolM. (2007) The aftermath of civil war (1043). World Bank Publications.
27.
ClaytonG.ThomsonA. (2016). Civilianizing civil conflict: Civilian defense militias and the logic of violence in intrastate conflict. International Studies Quarterly, 60(3), 499–510. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqv011
28.
CohenD. K.NordåsR. (2015). Do states delegate shameful violence to militias? Patterns of sexual violence in recent armed conflicts. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(5), 877–898. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715576748
29.
CohenS. (2001). States of denial: Knowing about atrocities and suffering. Polity Press.
30.
CollierD.MunckG. L. (Eds.), (2022). Critical junctures and historical legacies: Insights and methods for comparative social science. Rowman & Littlefield.
31.
CollierD. (2011). Understanding process tracing. PS: political science & politics, 44(4), 823–830.
32.
CollierP.ElliottV. L.HegreH.HoefflerA.Reynal-QuerolM.SambanisN. (2003). Breaking the conflict trap: Civil war and development policy. The World Bank and Oxford University Press.
33.
Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación (CVR). (2003a). Informe final, Anexo 2: Estimación del total de víctimas. Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación.
34.
Compendio de Legislación para Víctimas del Terrorismo (2002). Lugar de la Memoria, la Tolerancia y la Inclusión Social (LUM). Lima, Peru: Centro de Documentación e Investigación.
35.
CVR. (2003c). Informe final, Tomo II, sección segunda: Los comités de autodefensa. In Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación. CVR.
36.
CVR. (2003b). Informe final, Tomo IV, sección tercera: Los escenarios de la violencia. In Capítulo 1: La Violencia en las Regiones. Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación.
37.
DalyS. Z. (2011). Bankruptcy, guns or campaigns: Explaining armed organizations’ post- war trajectories (doctoral dissertation): Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
38.
DegregoriC. I. (1998). Harvesting storms: Peasant rondas and the defeat of Sendero Luminoso in Ayacucho. Shining and other paths. Duke University Press.
39.
DegregoriC. I.CoronelJ.PinoP. D.StarnO. (1996). Las rondas campesinas y la derrota de Sendero Luminoso. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
40.
Del PinoP. (1992). Los campesinos en la guerra: o de como la gente comienza a ponerse macho. Perú: El Problema Agrario en Debate–SEPIA IV–Iquitos. Sepia.
41.
DownesA. B. (2006). Desperate times, desperate measures: The causes of civilian victimization in war. International Security, 30(4), 152–195. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec.2006.30.4.152
42.
EastinJ.ZechS. T. (2022). Joining the counterinsurgency: Explaining pro-government militia participation in the Philippines. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 45(9), 817–841. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610x.2019.1700029
43.
EckK. (2015). Repression by proxy: How military purges and insurgency impact the delegation of coercion. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(5), 924–946. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715576746
44.
ErmakoffI. (2014). Exceptional cases: Epistemic contributions and normative expectations. European Journal of Sociology, 55(2), 223–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003975614000101
45.
EstanconaC.BirdL.HinkkainenK.BapatN. (2019). Civilian self-defense militias in civil war. International Interactions, 45(2), 215–266.
46.
EstanconaC.ReidL. (2022). Pro-government militias and civil war termination. Conflict Management and Peace Science, 39(3), 291–310.
47.
FalletiT. G.MahoneyJ. (2015). The comparative sequential method. In Advances in comparative-historical analysis (pp. 211–239). Cambridge University Press.
48.
FlintJ.De WaalA. (2008). Darfur: A short history of a long war. Bloomsbury Publishing.
49.
ForneyJ. F. (2015). Who can we trust with a gun? Information networks and adverse selection in militia recruitment. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(5), 824–849.
García-GodosJ. (2006). Citizenship, conflict, and reconstruction. A case-study of the effects of armed conflict on peasant-state relations in tambo, Peru (doctoral dissertation). University of Oslo.
52.
GhobarahH. A.HuthP.RussettB. (2003). Civil wars kill and maim people—long after the shooting stops. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055403000613
53.
GilliganM. J.PasqualeB. J.SamiiC. (2014). Civil war and social cohesion: Lab-in-the-field evidence from Nepal. American Journal of Political Science, 58(3), 604–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12067
GorritiG. (2000). The shining path: A history of the millenarian war in Peru. Univ of North Carolina Press.
56.
HedmanE. L. (2000). State of siege: Political violence and vigilante mobilization in the Philippines. In Death squads in global perspective: Murder with deniability (pp. 125–151). Palgrave Macmillan US.
57.
HristovJ. (2009) Blood and capital: The paramilitarization of Colombia (48). Ohio University Press.
58.
HughesG.TripodiC. (2009). Anatomy of a surrogate: Historical precedents and implications for contemporary counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism. Small Wars and Insurgencies, 20(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/09592310802571552
59.
Human Rights Watch. (2008). DR Congo: New attacks on civilians. Human Rights Watch.
60.
Human Rights Watch. (2010). Paramilitaries’ heirs: The new face of violence in Colombia. Human Rights Watch.
61.
HuntingtonS. P. (1968). Political order in changing societies. Yale University Press.
62.
JenningsD. F.SeamanS. L. (1994). High and low levels of organizational adaptation: An empirical analysis of strategy, structure, and performance. Strategic Management Journal, 15(6), 459–475. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250150604
63.
JentzschC. (2022). Violent resistance: Militia formation and civil war in Mozambique. Cambridge University Press.
KalyvasS. N. (2006). The logic of violence in civil war. Cambridge University Press.
66.
KalyvasS. N.BalcellsL. (2010). International system and technologies of rebellion: How the end of the Cold War shaped internal conflict. American Political Science Review, 104(3), 415–429. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055410000286
67.
KapiszewskiD.MacLeanL. M.ReadB. L. (2015). Field research in political science: Practices and principles. Cambridge University Press.
68.
LevitskyS. (1998). Institutionalization and peronism: The concept, the case and the case for unpacking the concept. Party Politics, 4(1), 77–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068898004001004
69.
LinnB. M. (2000). The US Army and counterinsurgency in the Philippine war, 1899-1902. UNC Press Books.
70.
Llochegua’s Municipality Archives (2010-2022). Internal records accessed at the municipal government office, Llochegua, Ayacucho, Peru.
71.
Llochegua’s CAD Internal Records (2017-2022). Unpublished materials maintained by local militia leadership, accessed at the Central CAD Headquarters, Llochegua, Ayacucho, Peru.
72.
LoganC. (2013). The roots of resilience: Exploring popular support for African traditional authorities. African Affairs, 112(448), 353–376.
73.
López HernándezC. N. (2010). Y refundaron La patria… de cómo mafiosos Y políticos reconfiguraron el estado colombiano. Corporación Nuevo Arco Iris, Congreso, Visible, De Justicia, Grupo Método, Bogotá.
74.
LuY.TaoR. (2017). Organizational structure and collective action: Lineage networks, semiautonomous civic associations, and collective resistance in rural China. American Journal of Sociology, 122(6), 1726–1774. https://doi.org/10.1086/691346
75.
LupuN.PeisakhinL. (2017). The legacy of political violence across generations. American Journal of Political Science, 61(4), 836–851. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12327
76.
LustickI. S. (1996). History, historiography, and political science: Multiple historical records and the problem of selection bias. American Political Science Review, 90(3), 605–618. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082612
MahoneyJ.ThelenK. (Eds.), (2009). Explaining institutional change: Ambiguity, agency, and power. Cambridge University Press.
79.
O'DonnellG. (1993). On the state, democratization and some conceptual problems: A Latin American view with glances at some postcommunist countries. World Development, 21(8), 1355–1369. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750x(93)90048-e
80.
Oiga (1985-1989). Political magazine accessed at the LUM, Centro de Documentación e Investigación, Lima, Peru.
81.
OsorioJ.SchubigerL. I.WeintraubM. (2021). Legacies of resistance: Mobilization against organized crime in Mexico. Comparative Political Studies, 54(9), 1565–1596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414021989761
82.
PeicG. (2014). Civilian defense forces, state capacity, and government victory in counterinsurgency wars. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 37(2), 162–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610x.2014.862904
83.
RENAMU (2019). Registro Nacional de Municipalidades. Lima: Instituto Nacional de Estadística e Informática (INEI).
84.
Report on Comités de Autodefensa (code SCO_345_09). Archivo Central de la CVR, Defensoría del Pueblo. Lima, Perú: Report on Comités de Autodefensa.
85.
RichardsP. (1996). Fighting for the rain forest: War, youth, and resources in Sierra Leone. James Currey.
SchlichteK. (2010). Na krilima patriotisms—on the wings of patriotism: Delegated and spin-off violence in Serbia. Armed Forces & Society, 36(2), 310–326. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x09339897
88.
SchuberthM. (2015). The challenge of community-based armed groups: Towards a conceptualization of militias, gangs, and vigilantes. Contemporary Security Policy, 36(2), 296–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/13523260.2015.1061756
89.
SchubigerL. I. (2021). State violence and wartime civilian agency: Evidence from Peru. The Journal of Politics, 83(4), 1383–1398. https://doi.org/10.1086/711720
90.
SeligmannL. J. (2008). Agrarian reform and peasant studies: The Peruvian case. A Companion to Latin American Anthropology, 325–351.
91.
SelznickP. (1957). Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. Harper & Row.
92.
SmithM. L. (1992) Entre dos fuegos: ONG, desarrollo rural y violencia política. IEP ediciones.
93.
SnyderR. (2001). Scaling down: The subnational comparative method. Studies in Comparative International Development, 36(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02687586
94.
SoiferH. (2020). Shadow cases in comparative research. Qualitative and Multi-Method Research, 18(2), 9–18.
95.
SoiferH.VergaraA. (Eds.), (2019). Politics after violence: Legacies of the shining path conflict in Peru. University of Texas Press.
96.
SpiresA. J. (2011). Contingent symbiosis and civil society in an authoritarian state: Understanding the survival of China’s grassroots NGOs. American Journal of Sociology, 117(1), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1086/660741
StantonJ. A. (2015). Regulating militias: Governments, militias, and civilian targeting in civil war. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(5), 899–923. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715576751
99.
StollD. (2018). Rigoberta Menchú and the story of all poor Guatemalans. Routledge.
100.
SuchmanM. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610. https://doi.org/10.2307/258788
101.
ThomsonA.PankhurstD. (2022). From control to conflict: A spectrum and framework for understanding government-militia relationships. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 48(6), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1057610x.2022.2116972
102.
ValentinoB. (2004). Final solutions: Mass killing and genocide in the 20th century. Cornell University Press.
103.
WeintraubM.VargasJ. F.FloresT. E. (2015). Vote choice and legacies of violence: Evidence from the 2014 Colombian presidential elections. Research & Politics, 2(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015573348
104.
WillemsE. (2020). Open secrets & hidden heroes: Violence, citizenship and transitional justice in (post-)conflict Peru (doctoral dissertation). Ghent University.
105.
WoodE. J. (2003). Insurgent collective action and civil war in El Salvador. Cambridge University Press.
World Bank. (2000). World development report 2000/2001: Attacking poverty. World Bank.
108.
YomS. (2015). From methodology to practice: Inductive iteration in comparative research. Comparative Political Studies, 48(5), 616–644. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414014554685
109.
YoromsG. J. (2017). Militias as a social phenomenon: Towards a theoretical construction. In Civil militia (pp. 31–50). Routledge.
