COUNSTER introduces a novel triadic framework to investigate how governments strategically engage with non-state armed actors’ constituents — and why some of these strategies succeed while others fail.
Explore the Project ContactMilitary power is neither the only, nor the most effective, tool in governments’ arsenal. Only 7–15% of terrorist groups have ever been defeated by military force alone.
Policymakers and scholars have long treated armed conflict as a military problem. Yet decades of counterinsurgency show that force alone rarely resolves root causes — it more often generates new grievances. COUNSTER asks a different question: why, how, and under what circumstances do governments fight non-state armed actors by engaging the constituents those actors claim to represent?
We call that strategy counstering. It runs from attractive measures — reforms, concessions, exemptions, recognition — to repressive ones such as curfews, travel bans, and forced displacement. Both are widespread; neither is well understood. Over five years the project builds the first global dataset of these measures, tests how constituents actually react to them across four conflict contexts, and triangulates the results through expert surveys.
Read the full project →