Armed groups and non-state actors

Answer

An organised armed group that is not the regular forces of a state — such as a rebel group, militia, insurgency, terrorist group or private military company.

Answer

They drive most modern conflicts, can control territory and populations, and resist far stronger states using asymmetric tactics.

Answer

Tactics used by a weaker side to avoid open battle with a stronger army — guerrilla warfare and terrorism.

Answer

A firm that sells armed force and security services for money — a type of non-state armed actor.

Answer

They use asymmetric tactics, hide among civilians, and can be resupplied by outside backers or funded through resources and crime.

Answer

They may lack a single leader who can sign a deal, may reject the state's legitimacy, and may fund themselves, so they have less reason to stop.

Answer

They have diffused power in conflict away from states, driving many wars and resisting far stronger armies, though states still dominate overall.

Answer

States retain the greatest hard power (armies, borders), the legitimacy to make binding peace, and most armed groups depend on state backers.

Answer

Often yes — the same group is labelled differently by opponents and supporters, so labels are political and methods matter for judgement.

Answer

By their methods and respect for civilians as much as by the justice of their cause — deliberately targeting civilians is widely condemned.

Answer

Power in conflict has diffused toward non-state actors, but states retain decisive hard power and legitimacy — so power is shared and shifting, not transferred.