ABSTRACT

In 2012, several Jihadi armed groups stormed the northern part of Mali and became the unchallenged rulers of two-thirds of the country. Each group governed based on Islamic Law, codifying violence against their enemies in combat and the populations they controlled. Despite drawing on similar jihadist ideology, these governing systems differed significantly in their uses of violence and jurisprudence. What explains the emergence and legitimization of such contrasting norms? We compare patterns of violence and restraint in the regions of Kidal and Gao based on interviews with diverse protagonists of the occupation, including former members of Ansar Dine and the Movement for the Unity of Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO). In Kidal, the Ansar Dine commander’s decision to follow local Islamic jurisprudence limited violence. In contrast, MUJAO rule over Gao used forms of punishment encompassing physical violence to assert political hegemony despite opposition from influential local imams and youth movements. Figures among the noncombatant population also influenced the formation and interpretation of norms among these groups, though less so under strong military imperatives. The findings highlight the importance of searching for a common language over norms of government between insurgents and populations as a key source of restraint.

摘要

2012 年，几个圣战武装团体袭击了马里北部，成为该国三分之二地区无可争议的统治者。每个团体都根据伊斯兰教法进行治理，将在战斗中对敌人及其控制的人口的暴力行为编纂为法典。尽管借鉴了类似的圣战意识形态，但这些治理体系在使用暴力和法学方面存在显着差异。是什么解释了这种对比鲜明的规范的出现和合法化？我们根据对占领的不同主角的采访，比较了基达尔和加奥地区的暴力和克制模式，包括前伊斯兰卫士组织和西非圣战统一运动 (MUJAO) 的前成员。在基达尔，伊斯兰支持者组织指挥官遵循当地伊斯兰教法的决定限制了暴力行为。相比之下，尽管受到当地有影响力的阿訇和青年运动的反对，MUJAO 对 Gao 的统治仍使用包括身体暴力在内的惩罚形式来维护政治霸权。非战斗人口中的数字也影响了这些群体之间规范的形成和解释，尽管在强大的军事命令下影响较小。调查结果强调了在叛乱者和民众之间寻找一种超越政府规范的共同语言作为克制的关键来源的重要性。