According to the extant literature, state leaders pursue mass ethnic violence against minority groups in wartime if they believe that those groups are collaborating with an enemy. Treating the wartime leadership of a combatant state as a coherent unit, however, is misleading. Even in war, leaders differ in the degree to which they prioritize goals such as maintaining or expanding the territory of the state, and on whether they believe that minority collaboration with the enemy influences their ability to achieve those goals. Also, how leaders react to wartime threats from minority groups depends largely on the role that political organizations based on non-ethnic cleavages play in society. Depending on those cleavages, wartime minority collaboration may result in limited deportations and killings, ethnic cleansing, or minimal violence. A comparison of the policies of three multinational empires toward ethnic minority collaborators during World War I—the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Italians, the Ottoman Empire and Armenians, and the Russian Empire and Muslims in the South Caucasus—illustrates this finding.

中文翻译：

---

战时种族清洗及其替代方案：奥匈帝国、奥斯曼帝国和俄罗斯帝国的比较

根据现有文献，如果国家领导人认为少数群体与敌人勾结，他们就会在战时对少数群体实施大规模种族暴力。然而，将一个战斗国家的战时领导层视为一个连贯的单位是一种误导。即使在战争中，领导人在优先考虑维持或扩大国家领土等目标的程度方面也存在差异，以及他们是否认为少数族裔与敌人的合作会影响他们实现这些目标的能力。此外，领导人如何应对来自少数群体的战时威胁，很大程度上取决于基于非种族分裂的政治组织在社会中所扮演的角色。根据这些分歧，战时少数族裔合作可能会导致有限的驱逐和杀戮、种族清洗或最小的暴力。