Why do states support certain rebel groups in civil war? a dyadic analysis of Middle Eastern power relations

Official URL: http://192.168.1.20/record=b1505250 (Table of Contents)

Why do states choose to intervene in certain civil wars and abstain from taking an active role in others? I argue that the choice process of the possible interveners is characterized by a number of international factors, most important ones being internationalization of the conflict, and contiguity, alliance patterns, and shared population characteristics between the possible intervener and the state in conflict. I empirically examine the countries that experienced a civil war in the Middle East following the Iranian Revolution, using a conflict and possible intervener dyad, analyzing 18 instances of civil war covering a temporal span of 29 years, between 1979 and 2007. To capture the essence of strategic behavior, the dyadic data includes different variables from individual state level, dyadic level and system level. The results of the analysis show that contiguity, alliance and internationalization of the conflict provide the most robust explanations for third party support to rebel groups. With the results, we can claim that states perceive third-party intervention as leverage against other states. When there are no other options outside a militarized interstate dispute, states may choose to apply pressure using these conflicts as a foreign policy tool.