IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/pepspp/v8y2002i4n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Limits of Manipulation Theory: The Apartheid Third Force and the ANC-Inkatha Conflict in South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Melander Erik

    (Uppsala University)

Abstract

The paradox that the overwhelming majority of the fatalities in the political violence during the Apartheid era and the transition to democracy in South Africa were blacks killed by other blacks has in some previous analyses been explained as the consequence of manipulation by the security agencies of the regime, the secretive so-called Third Force. The case of the conflict between the ANC and Inkatha, however, points up a crucial weakness in the manipulation explanation for civil violence in general, and ethnic conflict in particular, namely - how come other actors would allow themselves to be manipulated into taking actions which they know will be very costly and risky? The conclusion of this study is that the manipulation strategy employed by the Third Force to some extent influenced the character of the war between the ANC and Inkatha, but did not cause that war. Instead, the actors' rational pursuit of their own interests under conditions of uncertainty provides a better account for the escalating conflict.

Suggested Citation

  • Melander Erik, 2002. "The Limits of Manipulation Theory: The Apartheid Third Force and the ANC-Inkatha Conflict in South Africa," Peace Economics, Peace Science, and Public Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 8(4), pages 146-190, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:8:y:2002:i:4:n:1
    DOI: 10.2202/1554-8597.1073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-8597.1073
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1554-8597.1073?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:pepspp:v:8:y:2002:i:4:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.