Abstract Debates over the links between ethnicity and conflict often focus on the national level and take an ahistorical approach. This approach hides cases of ethnic conflict that arise at the subnational level and leaves unanswered questions over how ethnicity became a driver of conflict. This article explores these blind spots, using three cases in the African Great Lakes region. The cases reviewed here are the bipolar situations of Hema v. Lendu in Ituri (DRC), Banyarwanda/Banyamulenge v. ‘Autochthons’ in South and North Kivu (DRC), and Hima v. Iru in Ankole (Uganda). These cases suggest that polarisation is a more useful approach than fragmentation, but simple correlations between ethnic dyads and conflict obfuscate the nature and depths of the cleavages, as well as the mechanisms fuelling them. We elaborate on the pathways of escalation, highlighting how and when elite manipulations can activate deeply held identitarian norms. We conclude by emphasising the many lulls and moments of de-escalation, countering the portrayal of ethnic conflict as somehow inevitable.
Stearns et al. (Sun,) studied this question.