Gowrinathan (2021:66): Cites Kimerle Crenshaw: “‘We must contextualize any violence of the resistance in the violence they were resisting.’”
Mac Ginty (2011:137): “liberal internationalists believe that a functional Weberian state is a tool for conflict management. In their view, states can be neutral entities, able to attract the loyalty of citizens on the basis of their ability to deliver services and rise above particularisms associated with grievance or identity. In this view, the state can be a clearing-house for conflict, able to mediate between different demands and rely on institutional logic rather than nepotism, sectarianism, or identity politics.”
Mundy (2015:60): “The dismissal of actual rebel discourse is matched by another key a priori assumption: states are assigned a secondary or reactionary role in the generation of late warfare. Reducing the problem of civil wars to a problem of rebellion further strips away the politics of the violence. It also implicitly takes sides in the politics of naming causation, in so far as states, such as Algeria, are vindicated and rebels, such as FIS, are held responsible.”