Population Resettlement in Counterinsurgency: The Risks of Necropolitics

The Core of Necropolitics in Counterinsurgency

Necropolitics is a form of power where states exert dominance through controlling the conditions of life and death for entire populations. This can take the form of forced resettlement and resource scarcity.

In counterinsurgency, necropolitics aims to isolate insurgents from civilian populations by forcibly removing them from their homes and controlling their access to resources. However, this often has the opposite effect, increasing resentment and support for insurgents.

The Necropolitics of Rhodesian Resettlement

During the Rhodesian Bush War, the Rhodesian government implemented a population resettlement strategy known as "protected villages." These villages were often overcrowded, lacked basic services, and alienated the displaced communities.

Instead of weakening insurgents, these policies fostered resentment and, in many cases, strengthened local support for guerrilla movements. The Rhodesian state's necropolitical control ultimately failed, as displaced populations found common cause with insurgent groups.

Necropolitics of Population Resettlement in Angola and Mozambique

Similar resettlement programs in Angola and Mozambique also achieved mixed outcomes. While some areas experienced economic improvements, others faced severe disruptions and human rights violations.

The Portuguese government's failure to meet its promises of economic development and improved living conditions led to growing resentment and support for insurgents. By removing populations from their homelands and rendering them dependent on state provisions, the Portuguese sought to exert total control over their lives. However, this dehumanizing approach not only failed but also alienated those it intended to conquer.

Necropolitics of Vietnam's Strategic Hamlets

The Strategic Hamlet Program in Vietnam aimed to isolate Viet Cong (VC) guerrillas by forcibly relocating rural villagers into fortified settlements. However, the program prioritized control over the welfare of displaced communities, resulting in significant opposition.

The VC capitalized on the grievances engendered by the program, infiltrating strategic hamlets to dismantle fortifications and recruit disillusioned villagers. The Strategic Hamlet Program failed because it relied on necropolitical control, dehumanizing rural populations and fostering widespread discontent.

Resettlement Without Dehumanization: The British Model in Malaya

Unlike other cases of population resettlement, British efforts in Malaya were more successful in isolating insurgents and improving living conditions. This was due to a focus on addressing specific demographics, economic structures, and operational requirements.

The British established New Villages with essential amenities such as housing, schools, clinics, and utilities, raising the quality of life for many resettled communities. By minimizing upheaval and cultivating allegiance among the population, the British avoided the "boomerang effect" seen in other cases.

Conclusion: The Risks of Necropolitics in COIN Strategy

The history of resettlement programs as an element of counterinsurgency strategy reveals that necropolitics undermines the effectiveness of COIN efforts. By reducing displaced populations to subjects of survival, states practicing necropolitics often increase the support for insurgents they seek to eliminate.

Successful strategies, such as the British in Malaya, emphasize collaboration, community improvement, and avoiding dehumanizing control. Modern states must differentiate effective population relocation and protection strategies from necropolitics to achieve desired security and political outcomes.