3

All the talk about war in the media as been me wonder is there more Civil Wars or International Wars going on in the world today?

Affable Geek
  • 16,337
  • 8
  • 59
  • 105
Austin Davis
  • 141
  • 3
  • Is North/South Korea war counted as Civil or International? – user4012 Apr 23 '13 at 00:50
  • Also, do you count "national liberation" type fighting as civil wars? E.g. Balochistan, Kurds, Casamanche/Senegal – user4012 Apr 23 '13 at 00:54
  • North/South Korea I would count as international since its two separate countries. National liberation I would clarify as civil since its people who live in the same country fighting one another, even though the oppressors might have arrived from another country. – Austin Davis Apr 23 '13 at 03:59
  • Well, you can do that, but North Koreans have a lot more "same-countriedness" with South Koreans than Kurds do with Iranians or Iraqui Arabs. – user4012 Apr 23 '13 at 04:46
  • The edited title doesn't make any sense. Nearly all wars are fought inside of a particular country. –  Apr 24 '13 at 16:34
  • A better wording, IMHO, would be "Are there presently more wars classified as internal conflicts vs. international conflicts?" –  Apr 24 '13 at 16:35

1 Answers1

5

Wikipedia lists this for ongoing 2013 conflicts:

Major ones (>1000 fatalities total):

Civil   4 (Burma, Columbia, Mexican cartel wars, Sudan)
Civil+  3 (Syria, Iraq, Yemen)
Civil++ 4 (Somali, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali)

Civil+ means that the conflict is civil war in essence BUT there are foreign forces involved on one or both of the sides in the form of random fighters (e.g. transnational Jihadi fighters).

Civil++ means that the conflict is civil war in essence BUT there are organized foreign forces of another nation involved on one of the sides, e.g. African Union, French or American.

  • Interestingly enough, none are pure 100% international wars (As in, one nation state against another), though some of Civil++ can be borderline that way (hard to draw an objective line between "puppet government propped up by hostile foreign invaders" and "legitimate civil war side asking foreign power for help", as in Soviet invasion of Afghanistan vs 2013 presence of USA there).

  • Also, an interesting pattern is that, contrary to typical expectations, USA is only involved in 2 of those conflicts as of 2013, unless you count very unofficial pinpoint efforts in Yemen that aren't germane to the main conflict).

Then we have a list of "minor" conflicts (with <1000 casualties, though I seriously doubt they seem minor to the victims).

I'll try to count them later after OP provides clarifications to the comments.

user4012
  • 92,336
  • 19
  • 225
  • 386
  • Thx for the answer, great classification – Austin Davis Apr 23 '13 at 04:15
  • I would say that Afghanistan counts as an international war still. It was stable until the US stepped in after 9-11. You do not have Egypt and Lybia there despite ongoing fighting that is almost exclusively civil war. – SoylentGray Apr 23 '13 at 16:00
  • @Chad - Lybia didn't have >1000 casualties in 2012 or 2013 so is in the "minor" conflicts list. Egypt was always "minor" casualty wise. – user4012 Apr 24 '13 at 22:37
  • @DVK - I think that depends on how you define casualties. For some reason we in the west do not seem to define non american civilian or foriegn illegal combatants(by our definition) as casuaties – SoylentGray Apr 25 '13 at 13:14
  • @Chad - that article was going by amount of people killed. – user4012 Apr 25 '13 at 13:15
  • Ahh fatalities != casualties. Casualties are anyone injured. – SoylentGray Apr 25 '13 at 13:19
  • @Chad - sloppy wording on my part. The answer itself (if you see line #2) says "fatallities" – user4012 Apr 25 '13 at 13:23
  • I wonder how come people call what's going on in Syria as a "Civil War", since the puppet government there is using Ballistic Missiles and recently Chemical Weapons against civilian areas (on the other side, the rebels are fighting with very less lethal weapons e.g. AK47, tanks). So they do not have two religions/areas/provinces fighting, rather it was started as a revolution for democracy and turned to be a nation killing its own people! – Ken D Aug 22 '13 at 13:28
  • @LordCover - you should really look into details of what's happening before making comments. It's a civil war between alawites and shiites and sunnis. Weapons availability doesn't matter, and how it started also doesn't. For all intents and purposes it's a civil war. – user4012 Aug 22 '13 at 13:58
  • I am Syrian and I still refuse that you call it a "civil war". Sectarian face of the war is not on the surface and for me, weapons difference should be taken into consideration. – Ken D Aug 25 '13 at 10:58
  • @LordCover - I'm going by common English definition. "A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same nation state or republic. The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies". Fits 100% and doesn't mention weapons. – user4012 Aug 25 '13 at 12:49