Mobilizing in Uncertainty: A Response to Caspersen, Driscoll, and Schatz

Mobilizing in Uncertainty is a product of a deep commitment to individuals whose lives have been marked by fi rst-hand experiences of intergroup violence and war, to cumulative efforts across diverse disciplinary traditions to understand these experiences and their implications for social and political processes we study, and to methodologically rigorous research cen-tered on the meanings that participants in these processes attribute to their reality and grounded insights that can emerge as a result. The contributors to the Symposium picked up on these foundations. Their commentaries highlight the challenging fi eldwork and careful attention to the voices of ordinary people underlying this book and my openness about the design and process of research, including the changes that took place along the way. They also point out empirical and theoretical contributions of the book, identifying the reconstruction of events of Abkhaz mobilization in the context of Georgian-Abkhaz con- fl ict and the war of 1992 – 1993 in particular, the interaction of prewar shared understandings of con fl ict and one ’ s role in it and social networks at the time of mobilization, and the sig-ni fi cance of uncertainty in mobilization for war as the pillars of the book that can have inter-disciplinary purchase. I appreciate the generosity animating these commentaries. Caspersen ’ s, Driscoll ’ s, and Schatz ’ s critical engagement with the book also points to areas of clari fi cation, discussion, and future research. I will begin by clarifying the purpose of the book, particularly in response to Driscoll ’ s commentary. I will then turn to questions of ‘ ex-post ’ explanation raised by Caspersen and will conclude by accepting Schatz ’ s invitation to think further about the generalizability and extensions of this research.