It never changes War |
![]() |
A view to kill |
An insurgency is any kind of armed rebellion against an established authority by a group not recognized as a legitimate belligerent,[note 1] regardless of the form of violence or the nature of the regime being fought. Some insurgents acquire a reputation as good, freedom-loving heroes, while others are nothing but bandits and terrorists trying to destroy all that is good. Most end up as both, depending on the timing or audience.
One particularly well-known and successful insurgency started in the 1770s in North America.[1]
The best known theorist of insurgency is Mao Zedong, who wrote On Guerrilla Warfare.[2] He laid out the best blueprint ever written for the practical insurgent.[note 2] Specifically, Mao laid out the importance of winning the "hearts and minds" of the population, a crucial move because the population provides the support and cover for the insurgency.
Mao laid out three "phases" of insurgency:
This is not the only theory of insurgency, however. Focoism was a popular theory in the 1960s and 70s that focused on the ability of violence to create its own logic and win its own support, bypassing step one. While it seemed to work in Cuba under Che Guevera,[3] it has not enjoyed any success since then.
Many insurgent groups use terrorism as a tactic to weaken the opposing state or to cow the population into submission. This has not produced many tangible victories as of yet, if only because it tends to harden the opponents against any form of reconciliation rather than promote it.[note 3]
However, many have theorized that terrorism can be an effective tactic for the first phase of an insurgency, as a way of establishing control of a small region and of building support before moving on to stage 2. However, few terrorist groups have put this into practice, and it explicitly violates Mao's precepts for building support.
We have come to regard insurgency as a foreign and unpleasant phenomenon that does not apply to our own experience. The problem [...] is that denial about the popular character of revolutionary resistance serves largely to distort our understanding of the nation's origins. For ordinary Americans confronting the crisis of imperial rule between 1774 and 1776, discussions about insurgency occurred all the time. [...] The men and women who became insurgents did not initially welcome armed confrontation with Great Britain. [...] At some point, however, they [...] accepted violence against the imperial state as a legitimate form of political resistance.