Secessionism and Wartime Sexual Violence

Abstract

Sexual violence (SV) in secessionist conflicts reflects distinct political intentions behind rebels’ pursuit of statehood and incumbents’ commitment to territorial integrity. I argue that, compared with their counterparts in non-secessionist conflicts, (1) secessionist rebels are more motivated to eschew SV to garner domestic support and international recognition, while (2) central governments are more incentivized to employ SV to repress and discourage secessionist endeavors. I further theorize that, in secessionist conflicts relative to non-secessionist conflicts, (3) rebel-perpetrated SV is more likely to go unreported, whereas (4) state-perpetrated SV is less likely to go unreported, primarily because of secessionist rebels’ legitimacy-seeking and international actors’ disproportionate attention to heavy-handed state SV. Zero-inflated ordered probit analysis strongly supports these differential implications of secessionist strife for rebel and state SV and the reporting thereof. The theoretical and empirical contributions presented in this article enrich both our understanding of wartime SV and broader conflict studies.