Global datasets on interstate armed conflict suggest that African states clash with each other rarely and only for short periods. This research note shows that existing datasets paint a misleading picture. In fact, African states fight each other more often and for longer than is commonly thought, but they do so by mutually intervening in each other's intrastate conflicts. Instead of relying solely on their own armed forces, they support their rival's armed opposition groups. Such mutual interventions—most prevalent in Africa but also evident in other regions—thus span the boundaries of interstate and intrastate conflict. As a result, they have been largely overlooked by conflict scholars. Our note conceptualizes mutual intervention as a distinct form of interstate conflict, comparing and contrasting it with concepts like proxy war, competitive intervention, and international rivalry. The note then presents the first systematic survey of mutual interventions across the African continent. We identify twenty-three cases between 1960 and 2010 and demonstrate that they typically ended independently of their associated intrastate conflicts. We conclude with a research agenda that involves studying the onset, duration, termination, and consequences of mutual interventions, including collecting data on mutual interventions outside Africa to explore cross-regional differences.

中文翻译：

---

非洲的相互干预

关于州际武装冲突的全球数据表明，非洲国家之间很少发生冲突，而且只在短时间内发生。这份研究报告表明，现有的数据集描绘了一幅误导性的画面。事实上，非洲国家之间的争斗比人们普遍认为的更频繁、持续时间更长，但它们是通过相互干预彼此的国内冲突来做到这一点的。他们不是仅仅依靠自己的武装部队，而是支持对手的武装反对派团体。这种相互干预——在非洲最为普遍，但在其他地区也很明显——因此跨越了州际和州内冲突的边界。结果，它们在很大程度上被冲突学者所忽视。我们的说明将相互干预概念化为一种独特的州际冲突形式，将其与代理人战争等概念进行比较和对比，竞争性干预和国际竞争。该说明随后介绍了对整个非洲大陆相互干预的第一次系统调查。我们确定了 1960 年至 2010 年间的 23 个案例，并证明它们通常独立于相关的州内冲突而结束。我们以一项研究议程结束，该议程涉及研究相互干预的开始、持续时间、终止和后果，包括收集非洲以外相互干预的数据以探索跨区域差异。