Rights Lab project lead: Kevin Bales

Funder: AHRC, ESRC

Duration: 2015 to date

Programme: Law and Policy

About:

The Contemporary Slavery in Armed Conflict (CSAC) dataset measures incidents of enslavement, human trafficking, forced labour, forced marriage, and related violations committed by armed actors during the years 1989-2016.

An estimated 50 million people are enslaved across the world. Responding to the breadth and size of this threat to human security, plus a growing interest in the nature and role of contemporary slavery within armed conflict, we developed a coding process that would identify when and how state and non-state actors have used enslavement within modern conflicts.

The coding of enslavement began with an analysis of all recorded armed conflicts from 1989 to 2016 in the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCPD). Using the UCPD data, the research team systematically searched online and other records to find instances of enslavement, conflict-by-conflict, and year-by-year, ranging from the use of child soldiers, forced marriage, forced labour, and human trafficking. This coding exercise is the first systematic and large-scale inquiry into various types of enslavement within modern armed conflicts.

We seek to share these data so that others may explore, analyse, and develop this area of inquiry. We invite suggestions as to how these data may be improved and we welcome the use of these data to explore more critically and systemically when and how slavery is a tool of modern warfare.

The full project team includes: Professor Kevin Bales CMG, Dr. Monti Datta, Angharad Smith, Christine Annerfalk, Gabriel Bales, Anne Andersen

Data and Findings: The CSAC database is the first systematic and large-scale inquiry into various types of enslavement within modern armed conflicts. It measures reports of conflict-related enslavement committed by armed actors during the years 1989-2016. It includes every case and type of slavery across 171 wars and conflicts fought between those dates.

The armed actors include nation-states, pro-government militias, rebel groups, insurgents, and other sub-state actors.

The database records information on the forms of slavery present, including child soldiering, sexual exploitation / forced marriage, forced labour, and human trafficking. Another variable records whether the use of slavery by an armed actor was in pursuit of tactical or strategic aims or both.

Sides involved in a conflict are designated Side A or Side B. Both are by definition primary parties to the conflict. Side A is always the government side of internal conflicts and the colonial state in extrastate conflicts. Side B is always the opposition side of internal conflicts and is a state in interstate conflicts. Conflicts are coded as to whether each form of slavery was perpetrated by Side A, Side B, neither, or both.

While the plight of child soldiers has been clear for some time, the extent of other forms of slavery – from forced marriage and the sale of slaves through human trafficking by armed groups – has never been measured.

We see the coding of slavery within conflict as a step toward generating more scholarship, debate, and understanding of when and how state and non-state actors use enslavement within armed conflicts, with the goal of learning how to mitigate and possibly eradicate slavery in warfare.

In the future, we will extend this longitudinal dataset back to WWII as well as keeping it up-to-date with new conflicts. Future lines of research to be considered include:

Geographical contexts of conflicts and potential effects on types of enslavement Reasons/predictors for tactical enslavement and for strategic enslavement Potential risks for further exploitation of enslavement in post-conflict environments Potentially unique effects of enslavement in conflicts on the victims and perpetrators Key findings are that: Slavery and human trafficking are present in 90 per cent of modern wars. The most common type of enslavement in war zones was the use of child soldiers, occurring in 87 per cent of armed conflicts, with child soldiers more likely to be used by Side B. Enslaved children were found in 252 disputes over territory and 221 disputes over governmental issues. When Side A and Side B both enslaved children, 190 instances were over territory, and 282 were due to governmental disputes Sexual exploitation and/or forced marriage was present in a third (32 per cent) of modern wars. 21 per cent included forced labour and 14 per cent contained instances of human trafficking The data show that although nation-states (Side A) are less likely to enslave children as soldiers, they are more likely to engage in other forms of sexual violence in armed conflicts. It was observed that both ‘sides’ within a conflict commit sexual exploitation and forced marriage, with researchers recording 10 per cent of instances by Side A and 12 per cent by Side B, as well as 12 per cent of occasions where both sides used this form of slavery. This is in contrast to the use of child soldiers in armed conflicts, in which case Side A is rarely the offender. Compared to child soldiers and sexual exploitation/forced marriage, there were fewer instances of human trafficking, defined as the onward sale of enslaved persons. Side A is responsible for less than one percent of all cases, whereas Side B accounts for 15 per cent of all cases. Enslavement is more likely to take place in internal armed conflicts than other conflict types, such as the recent war involving ISIS in Iraq. The dataset shows that slavery in war can be both a tactic (forced labour supporting armed groups) and strategic – such as the slavery used by ISIS as part of a strategy of genocide against the Yazidi people. Bibliography: The following publications were used in developing the CSAC dataset (as of October 2020):

Al-Dayel, Nadia, Andrew Mumford & Kevin Bales (2020): Not Yet Dead: The Establishment and Regulation of Slavery by the Islamic State, Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, DOI: 10.1080/1057610X.2020.1711590

Bales, Kevin and Zoe Trodd. 2008. To Plead Our Own Cause: Personal Stories by Today's Slaves. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Bales, Kevin. 2012. Disposable People: New Slavery In the Global Economy, 3rdEdition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Beber, Bernd Beber and Christopher Blattman. “The Logic of Child Soldiering and Coercion.” International Organization/ Volume 67 / Issue 01 / January 2013, pp 65 104

Gates, Scott and Simon Reich. 2010. Child Soldiers in the Age of Fractured States. University of Pittsburg Press.

Haer, Roos and Tobias Böhmelt. 2017. “Could Rebel Child Soldiers Prolong Civil Wars?” Cooperation and Conflict, Vol. 52(3) 332–359.

Hoiskar, Astri Halsan. 2001. “Underage and Under Fire: An enquiry into the use of child soldiers 1994–8.” Childhood. SAGE Press. Vol. 8(3): 340–360

Lasley, Trace and Clayton Thyne. 2015. “Secession, Legitimacy and The Use of Child Soldiers.” Conflict Management and Peace Science.Vol. 32(3) 289-308.

Mahtani KR, Jefferson T, Heneghan C, et al. 2018. “What is a complex systematic review? Criteria, definition, and examples,” BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 23/4: 127-130.

McAlpine, Alys, Mazeda Hossain and Cathy Zimmerman. 2016. “Sex trafficking and sexual exploitation in settings affected by armed conflicts in Africa, Asia and the Middle East: systematic review.” BMC International Health and Human Rights(2016) 16:34

Skinner, Benjamin. 2008. A Crime So Monstrous: Face-to-Face with Modern-DaySlavery. Free Press.