The conflict in Chechnya is characterized by a high degree of complexity. To capture this complexity, the authors produced an actors' network analysis drawing on one of the largest event databases today. The aim was to identify the main actors involved in the conflict, track down the most important conflictive and cooperative ties between actors, and compare the quality and intensity of interactions among actor groups. In total, 2,818 events reported between 2002 and 2005 were assigned forty-four actors categories. Measures of centrality and power and a combination of principal component and cluster analysis were used to produce graphs of the network. The authors found civilians to be the most important actors, closely followed by the Russian military, the Chechen fighters, and the Chechen government. The results are discussed in light of the current situation in Chechnya with reference to chances and limitations of the network approach with event data.
Albert, Réka, Hawoong Jeong, and Albert-László Barabási. 2000. Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature406:378-382.
2.
Allaman, Jacques. 2000. La guerre de Tchétchénie ou l'irrésistible ascension de Vladimir Poutine. Genève: Georg Editeur.
3.
Astigarraga, Isabelle. 2000. Tchétchénie. Un peuple sacrifié. Paris: L'Harmattan.
4.
Aydaev, A.1996. Chechentsy: Istoria i sovremennost. Moscow: Mir Domu Tvoemu.
5.
Barabási, Albert-László, and Réka Albert. 1999. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science286:509-512.
6.
BBC. 2004. Religious leaders in Russia, Chechnya condemn Groznyy blast. BBC Monitoring Former Soviet Union, May 9, 1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4115279.stm.
7.
Bonacich, P.1987. Power and centrality: Afamily of measures. American Journal of Sociology92:1170-1182.
8.
Bond, Doug, Joe Bond, Churl Oh, J.Craig Jenkins, and Charles Lewis Taylor. 2003. Integrated data for events analysis (IDEA): An event typology for automated event data development. Journal of Peace Research40 (6): 733-745.
9.
Borgatti, S. P., M. G. Everett, and L. C. Freeman. 1999. UCINET 6.0. Natick, MA: Analytic Technologies.
10.
Bowman, Janna. 2002. Escalating violence in Colombia, civilians arewar's main victims: Reliefweb. http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/rwb.nsf/AllDocsByUNID/913d9b7b16a40bc485256bde005aa16c.
11.
Costenbader, Elizabeth, and Thomas W. Valente. 2003. The stability of centrality measures when networks are sampled. Social Networks25:283-307.
12.
Dunlop, John B.1998. Russia confronts Chechnya: Roots of a separatist conflict. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Evangelista, Matthew. 2002. The Chechen wars: Will Russia go the way of the Soviet Union?Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
14.
Faber, J.1987. Measuring cooperation, conflict, and the social network of nations. Journal of Conflict Resolution31 (3): 483-464.
15.
Faust, Katherine, Karin E. Willert, David D. Rowlee, and John Skovretz. 2002. Scaling and statistical models for affiliation networks: Patterns of participation among Soviet politicians during the Brezhnew era. Social Networks24:231-259.
16.
Fisher, L., and J. W. Van Ness. 1971. Admissible clustering procedures. Biometrika58:91-104.
17.
Forum for Early Warning and Early Response (FEWER). 2004. Concluding document. In Ways to peace in Chechnya: Upholding human security through humanitarian dialogue. Spiez, Switzerland: FEWER.
18.
Freeman, L. C.1979. Centrality in social networks: Conceptual clarification. Social Networks1:215-239.
19.
Gall, Carlotta, and Thomas DeWaal. 1998. Chechnya: Calamity in the Caucasus. New York: New York University Press.
20.
Gerner, Deborah, and Philip A. Schrodt. 1998. The effects of media coverage on crisis assessment and early warning in the Middle East. In Early warning and early response, edited by S. Schmeidl and H. Adelman. New York: Columbia University Press.
21.
Gerner, Deborah, Philip Schrodt, Ronald A. Francisco, and Judith L. Weddle. 1994. Machine coding of event data using regional and international sources. International Studies Quarterly38:91-119.
22.
Gibson, James L.2001. Social networks, civil society, and the prospects for consolidating Russia's democratic transition. American Journal of Political Science45 (1): 51-69.
23.
Goldstein, Joshua S.1992. A conflict-cooperation scale for WEIS events data. Journal of Conflict Resolution36 (3): 369-385.
24.
Hartigan, J. A.1975. Clustering algorithms. New York: John Wiley.
25.
Hawkins, D. M.1974. The detection of errors in multivariate data using principal components. Journal of the American Statistical Association69:340-344.
26.
Hoff, Peter D.2003. Random effects models for network data. Working paper, Seattle, WA.
27.
Hoff, Peter D., and Michael D. Ward. 2004. Modeling dependencies in international relations networks. Political Analysis12 (2): 160-175.
28.
Horne, John. 2002. Civilian populations andwartime violence: Towards an historical analysis. International Social Science Journal54 (174): 483-490.
29.
Johnson, Jeffrey C., and Lothar Krempel. 2004. Network visualization: The “Bush team” in Reuters news ticker 9/11-11/15/01. Journal of Social Structure5 (1). http://www.cmu.edu/joss/content/articles/volume5/JohnsonKrempel/.
30.
Knoke, David. 1990. Political networks. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
31.
Krempel, Lothar, and Thomas Plümer. 2003. Exploring the dynamics of international trade by combining the comparative advantages of multivariate statistics and network visualizations. Journal of Social Structure4 (1): 1-22.
32.
Krummenacher, Heinz, and Susanne Schmeidl. 1999. FAST: An integrated and interactive early warning system: The example of Central Asia. The Soviet and Post-Soviet Review24 (3): 147-161.
33.
Lieven, Anatol. 1998. Chechnya: Tombstone of Russian power. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
34.
Moore, Spencer, Eugenia Eng, and Mark Daniel. 2003. International NGOs and the role of network centrality in humanitarian aid operations: A case study of coordination during the 2000 Mozambique floods. Disasters27 (4): 305-318.
35.
Myers, Seven Lee. 2004. For Russia, a setback in Chechnya. New York Times, May 16, 4.2-4.2.
36.
Newman, M. E. J.2003. The structure and function of complex networks. Siam Review45:167-256.
37.
Red Cross, Commission I.1996. War victims and respect for international humanitarian law. International Review of the Red Cross310:36-42.
38.
SAS Institute. 2002. JMP 5.0.1 [Computer software]. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.
39.
Sattler, David. 2004. A small town in Russia. Wall Street Journal, September 7, 20-20.
40.
Schrodt, Philip A., and Deborah J. Gerner. 1994. Validity assessment of a machine-coded event data set for the Middle East, 1982-1992. American Journal of Political Science38:825-854.
41.
Schrodt, Philip A., Deborah J. Gerner, and Ömür Yilmaz. 2005. Using event data to monitor contemporary conflict in the Israel-Palestine dyad. International Studies Perspectives6 (2): 235-235.
42.
Scott, John. 2000. Social network analysis. 2nd ed.London: Sage.
43.
Seely, Robert. 2001. Russo-Chechen conflict, 1800-2000: A deadly embrace. London: Frank Cass.
44.
Smith, Sebastian. 1998. Allah's mountains: Politics and war in the Russian Caucasus. New York: I. B. Tauris.
45.
Starr, S. Frederick. 2004. A solution for Chechnya. The Washington Post, September 17, 27-27.
46.
Strogatz, Steven H.2001. Exploring complex networks. Nature410:268-276.
47.
Tallberg, Christian. 2004. Testing centralization in random graphs. Social Networks26:205-219.
48.
Tragedy in Russia. 2004. The Washington Post, September 5, 6-6.
49.
Trenin, Dmitri V., Aleksei V. Malashenko, and Anatol Lieven. 2004. Russia's restless frontier: The Chechnya factor in post-Soviet Russia. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
50.
Van Den Brink, René, and Robert P. Gilles. 2000. Measuring domination in directed networks. Social Networks22:141-157.
51.
Ware, Robert Bruce. 2004. Civil war in Chechnya: Political failure and strategic response. Journal of Social and Political Studies3 (27): 53-61.
52.
Widmer, Thomas, and Vera Tröger. 2004a. Ereignisdatenbasierte Netzwerkanalyse. In Anwendungen Sozialer Netzwerkanalyse, edited by U. Serdült. Zürich: Universität Zürich.
53.
Widmer, Thomas, and Vera Tröger. 2004b. Event data based network analysis (EDNA). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, March, Montreal, Canada.
54.
Williams, Daniel. 2000. Grozny is fallen to the ground; Chechens returning home find rubble, red tape—and little relief in sight. The Washington Post, April 30, 25-25.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
