UCDP

General information

First Active Year: 1989

Current Name: Government of Guatemala
Current Name full English: Government of Guatemala
Current Name full native language: n/a

Original Name: Government of Guatemala
Original Name full English: Government of Guatemala
Original Name full native language: n/a

Actor Chronology

This section contains information about (if applicable) group splinters, name changes, and alliances according to the UCDP definitions of these concepts.

UCDP has not recorded any Chronology Activities involving this group.

Conflict issues

Government of Guatemala - URNG

Conflict Goal Issues: The Unidad Revolucionaria Nacional Guatemalteca, Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unity, (UNRG) were a socialist and nationalist rebel group who established in 1982. UNRG was an umbrella organization to coordinate Guatemala’s main leftist rebel groups into a cohesive organization with the aim to overthrow the Guatemalan government to free the people. During its first year, the group published a unitary proclamation from which the project coded several expressed conflict goal issues. The group called for the rights of the Guatemalan to be respected, including basic needs, civil-, cultural-, gender-, human-, labor-, and religious rights, access to public services, namely health, housing, and education, and freedoms of association and expression. The group also called for a democratic governance structure and ousting of the sitting government, proclaiming its intent to “defeat our enemies, seize power and establish a Revolutionary, Patriotic, Popular and Democratic government.” Finally, in line with its socialist ideology, the group also emphasized their desire to reform the land distribution, as well as the economic system and structure, where the gains would benefit the Guatemalan people, rather than the rich and powerful. The group also expressed a desire to end conscription and rework the military forces.

As the conflict progressed, UNRG expressed several conflict goal issues. The group continued its emphasis on rights, specifically human-, cultural-, and labor rights. The group also reaffirmed its intent on establishing a functional democratic system within the country and began calling for electoral reform to alter several parts of the constitution to improve Guatemala’s democracy. UNRG also continuously called for a restructuring of the military and raised the intent to reform the police force as well. Further calls for constitutional amendments were raised in relation to the power and structure of the military. Calls for freedom of association and expression were not made after the year of the group’s emergence. It should be noted, however, that whilst not explicitly expressed, the group did remain intent on protecting the political and civil rights of the people. There were also no further calls for ousting the sitting government or reforming the executive structure, although calls for opposing the elections of 1989 were made as they were considered fraudulent. As the conflict progressed UNRG called for judicial reform for it to become capable of fulfilling its duties. In one instance the group called for a reformation of the parliamentary system to achieve the same goal. During the same timeframe, the group also called for increased importance and power of the law and courts to hinder corruption and exploitation. Finally, the group called for the decentralization of the Guatemalan state on two occasions, to give more power to regional authorities.

Throughout the conflict, issues of establishing a functional democratic structure, altering the economic system towards a socialist structure, improving the judicial system and legal framework giving more power to the law and the courts, restructuring the military and police force to reduce its power, as well as protecting the rights of the Guatemalan people were heavily emphasized and both frequently and continuously stated. All of these are to be considered main conflict goal issues of UNRG, although the establishment of a socialist democratic system were the most emphasized issues for the group.

Conflict Dynamics Issues: During the year of its emergence, UNRG stated several issues pertaining to the dynamics of the conflict. The group announced its struggle as a way of “massacred populations” to defend themselves and defeat its enemies, implicitly accusing the Guatemalan government of massacring its populace. The group also criticized current military conduct of “forced and discriminatory recruitment for military service”, and announced the group would end its dependence on foreign nations.

For the duration of the conflict, issues of atrocities and abuses by the Guatemalan state and military, continuously referring to massacres, genocides, atrocities, and a permanent state of terror created and enabled by the state. The group also remained insistent on the demilitarization of the country, and on the cessation of forced conscription into the military, which was motivated by further allegations of military misconduct. Throughout the conflict UNRG also began raising issues of collective targeting of people motivated by political adherence or class affiliation. Towards the later stages of the conflict, the URNG began calling for the international community to assist its cause in several ways. The group asked for political support through both action and rhetoric, as well as called for the international community to monitor and investigate human rights abuses perpetrated by the Guatemalan government. Finally, the group also asked for the presence of a third-party mediator, as well as for international support in the negotiation process. On two occasions, URNG also called for the safe resettlement of refugees, both internal and external.

The main issues raised by the URNG pertaining to the dynamics of the conflict were the conduct and structure of the military. The military’s continuous and frequent massacres and human rights violations, and its implicit acceptance from the government, were particularly emphasized by the group. Furthermore, whilst not stated in the beginning of the conflict, the frequency and emphasis of calls to the international community for monitoring of, and investigations into, human rights abuses by the government makes the issue of international intervention a main conflict dynamics issue as well.

Conflict Resolution Issues: Whilst URNG were not interpreted as stating any conflict resolution issues during the year of its emergence, the group stated several issues throughout the conflict. Initially, the group was focused on establishing negotiations and discussing the structure of those negotiations, as well as for the government to recognize wrongdoing and be held accountable for abuses. National dialogue was also emphasized as a conflict resolution issue. As the conflict progressed, all noted issues apart from national dialogue received continued emphasis. However, calls for compensation for the Guatemalan people, and for “the application of international humanitarian law and the integration of the truth commission” to enable truth and reconciliation processes to occur. These statements were also in tandem with continued calls for accountability and prosecution of perpetrators of human rights violations, terror, and its supporters. Calls for negotiations continued throughout the conflict and were combined with statements calling for the implementation of agreed upon peace agreements towards the end of the conflict.

The most heavily emphasized and continuously mentioned conflict resolution issues were the calls for accountability combined with enabling reconciliation and compensation processes for the affected people, as well as the emphasis on the establishment and structure of negotiations. Finally, the implementation is also to be considered a main issue, as it, despite being frequently mentioned only towards the end of the conflict, was heavily emphasized and continuously mentioned for the last five years of conflict.

Type of conflict issues: Conflict Goal Issues: Basic needs, Revenues from natural resources, Rule of law, Water resources, Change a specific law, Change economic system, Change of administrative divisions, Civil rights, Constitutional issues, Corruption, CPS: Democracy, CPS: Other/undefined system, Cultural rights, Decentralization, Disband para-military forces, Economic reforms, Education system: culture, Electoral reform, Foreign policy reform, Freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Gender rights, Human rights, Labor rights, Land reforms, Language rights, Law and order, Opposition to elections, Oust full executive, Protection of natural resources/the environment, Public services, Reform executive structure, Reform judicial system, Reform parliament, Religious rights, Restructure military forces, Restructure police forces

Conflict Dynamics Issues: Atrocities and abuses, Collective targeting: other group, Collective targeting: political, DFI: Removal of foreign influence, IFI: Foreign mediator, IFI: International court/tribunal/investigation, IFI: International monitoring, IFI: Political support, IFI: Use of foreign influence, Military conduct, Return of refugees/IDPs

Conflict Resolution Issues: Accountability/prosecution/investigation, Structure of negotiations, Call for negotiations, Call for truth and reconciliation processes, Compensation/restoration, National dialogue, Peace agreement implementation, Recognition of wrongdoing
Government of Central African Republic - anti-Balaka

Conflict Goal Issues: Anti-Balaka, anti-sword/anti-machete, was a mostly Christian rebel group in the Central African Republic (CAR). The group consisted of many different sub-groups and emerged as an alliance of several militias and emerged in 2013 following the ousting of former President Francois Bozize in 2013. During the year of its emergence, anti-Balaka called for two conflict goal issues calling for President Michel Djotodia to be removed from office and stated that a government position constituted a precondition for the group’s surrender.

In its second, and final coded, year of existence, the anti-Balaka reiterated its intentions to oust President Djotodia from office. Although the group did not restate intentions to establish executive power-sharing with themselves in government position, issues of parliamentary and security sector power-sharing were raised, calling for the incorporation of anti-Balaka members into the legislative and military national structures. The group also began calling for the establishment of security and constitutional order as well as for the civil rights and access to public services of the Central African people to be respected. Finally, anti-Balaka also accused the government of economic corruption: “a leader supposed to lead the Central African state is suspected of embezzling a large sum of money at a critical time when the Central African people are shaving the wall”.

The main conflict goal issue for anti-Balaka was the ousting of President Djotodia and his cabinet from power. This issue was continuously stated with heavy emphasis and was frequently indicated by the group during its brief coded existence.

Conflict Dynamics Issues: During the year of its emergence, anti-Balaka raised issues of atrocities and abuses committed by another Central African rebel group, Seleka, against the civilian population. The group also called for the removal of foreigners, calling for the removal of “jihadists from Chad and Sudan”.

In the second coded year of conflict, the group did not explicitly reiterate either of these issues. Instead, anti-Balaka stated that its goal was “to save the country from Chadian and Sudanese forces that have taken the country hostage, and to defend the Christian population”, indicating issues of collective targeting from military forces and calls for the removal of foreign military forces. The group also called for the removal of foreign military support to the Central African government from Chad. Finally, anti-Balaka also initiated a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Muslim civilians in the areas it controlled, stating that: “We don’t want any more Muslims in our country.” No particular main conflict dynamics issue was interpreted as no issues were stated in both coded years.

Conflict Resolution Issues: The only interpreted conflict resolution issue expressed by anti-Balaka in 2013 was a statement calling for general amnesty as a precondition for its forces to surrender to the government. This issue was not reiterated in 2014, although several further issues were raised. The group called for negotiations to be established and a ceasefire to be initiated: “We don't want war anymore. We wish the Central African authorities a dialogue for a return to peace in the Central African Republic.” After this, anti-Balaka also called for compensation of losses suffered during the fighting, the establishment of a national reconciliation process, and for a process of disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) to be initiated for combatants who wanted to reintegrate into Central African society. No main conflict resolution issue was interpreted for anti-Balaka.

Type of conflict issues: Conflict Goal Issues: Civil rights, Constitutional issues, Corruption, Executive power-sharing, Law and order, Oust head of the executive, Parliamentary power-sharing, Public services, Security sector power-sharing

Conflict Dynamics Issues: Atrocities and abuses, Call for collective targeting: religious, Collective targeting: religious, DFI: Removal of foreigners, DFI: Withdrawal of military intervention/foreign forces, DFI: Withdrawal of military support

Conflict Resolution Issues: Amnesties, Call for ceasefire, Call for negotiations, Call for truth and reconciliation processes, Compensation/restoration, DDR issues
Government of Mali - JNIM

Conflict Goal Issues: Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, Group for the Support of Islam and Muslims (JNIM) emerged as an Islamist rebel group following a merger of several jihadist groups. The rebel group was created in 2017, during which it stated one conflict goal issue. The group declared its intent to alter the judicial system as it considered the Mauritian government to not “rule according [to] Islamic Sharia law and it supported ‘Christian’ France against the mujahidin in Mali.” Essentially, the group’s first announced conflict goal was to establish Sharia law in Mali and declared opposition to those who resisted it.

During 2018, JNIM reaffirmed its intent to establish Sharia law in Mali but also expressed its opposition to the Malian elections, stating that the only solution to French occupation was jihad.

The main conflict goal issue of JNIM was the establishment of Sharia law in Mali.

Conflict Dynamics Issues: During its first year, JNIM accused the combined forces of France and Mali of conducting operations which resulted in the killing, arrest, and displacement of innocent Muslims. Based on this, JNIM called upon the French military to withdraw their military, and threatened revenge upon the French military and its allies for “killing its [JNIM’s] militants”.

In the following year, JNIM accused the French military to have conducted massacres against Muslims in Mali. This, once again, caused the group to call for withdrawal of French troops, stating that “war between us will not end until the last soldier from the soldiers of Crusader France evacuate the Muslim land of Mali”. During the second year the JNIM also called upon its diaspora community to assist their cause.

The main conflict dynamics issue of JNIM was the issue of atrocities against civilians and the withdrawal of foreign forces from Mali.

Conflict Resolution Issues: The project coded no statements from JNIM pertaining to conflict resolution issues.

Type of conflict issues: Conflict Goal Issues: Change judicial system, Opposition to elections

Conflict Dynamics Issues: Atrocities and abuses, DFI: Withdrawal of military intervention/foreign forces, IFI: Support from diasporas/foreign fighters, Revenge/vengeance

Conflict Resolution Issues:
Government of Mali - IS

Conflict Goal Issues: Islamic State, al-Dawla al-Islamiya, (IS) was a Salafist-Sunni Islamist global rebel group that emerged in Iraq and Syria in 2004. The group originally emerged with the goals of toppling the Iraqi regime and replacing the government with an Islamic state with Sharia law as well as ousting the occupying forces currently residing in the country, but its goals drastically shifted as it grew in size to wish to establish a global Islamic caliphate governed by Sharia law. Whilst the group was international for the majority of its existence, IS is considered a rebel group involved in several dyads as the group fought against, and attempted to overthrow, several individual governments as part of its international aims, and has been coded as such. However, many IS statements were not pertaining to specific countries, and the project has, hence, chosen to code them as pertaining to all countries with significant IS presence. Finally, whilst various groups have claimed allyship and adherence to IS, only statements from official IS groups have been coded by the project as legitimate sources for interpreting conflict issues. IS officially emerged in Mali in 2016, following the recognition of the Islamic State Greater Sahara (ISGS) as a legitimate faction of the group. During this year, the group made one statement pertaining to conflict goals when it stated its allegiance to the IS and their intentions to establish an Islamic state in Mali, aiming to incorporate it into the greater Islamic Caliphate.

Conflict Dynamics Issues: In the year prior to its recognition, when the group was created in 2015 the ISGS released a statement calling upon “all the jihadi groups to pledge allegiance to the Caliph, to unify the word of the Muslims and align the ranks in front of the enemies of religion”. This was the only statement interpreted by IS in Mali regarding conflict dynamics issues.

Conflict Resolution Issues: The project coded no statements from IS in Mali pertaining to conflict resolution issues.

Type of conflict issues: The coded conflict issues for this group are: Conflict Goal Issues: CPS: Islamic state

Conflict Dynamics Issues: IFI: Support from diasporas/foreign fighters

Conflict Resolution Issues:

Annual information

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Government of Guatemala - ORPA

1980

Actor Active in Dyad(s):

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Government of Guatemala - ORPA

1981

Actor Active in Dyad(s):

Government of Guatemala - FAR I

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - Civilians

Group Archive

This section contains annual information no longer systematically collected by the UCDP.

1975 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Troop Size: 13 000
Secondary Support: The U.S.A. was supplying approximately 4 million US$ in aid yearly, under the form of both weapons, non-weapons articles and training. This support was stopped in late 1977, when Congress forbid any aid to Guatemala on grounds of Human Rights abuses.

1976 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Troop Size: 14 000
Secondary Support: The U.S.A. was supplying approximately 4 million US$ in aid yearly, under the form of both weapons, non-weapons articles and training. This support was stopped in late 1977, when Congress forbid any aid to Guatemala on grounds of Human Rights abuses.

1977 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

1978 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Troop Size: 14 000

1979 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Government of Guatemala - ORPA

Troop Size: 21 000

1980 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Government of Guatemala - EGP

Government of Guatemala - ORPA

Troop Size: 21 000

1981 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - FAR I

Government of Guatemala - FAR II

Troop Size: 44 600
Comment on Troop Size: The total number of armed forces active during 1992.

1993 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - URNG

Troop Size: 43 900
Comment on Troop Size: The total number of armed forces active during 1993.

1994 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - URNG

Troop Size: 44 200
Comment on Troop Size: The total number of armed forces active during 1994.

1995 Group Archive

Government of Guatemala - URNG

Troop Size: 44 200
Comment on Troop Size: The total number of armed forces active during 1995.

Uppsala Conflict Data Program

Department of Peace and Conflict Research

UCDP

Government of Guatemala