Унутрашњи оружани облици угрожавања капацитета безбедности државе
Internal Armed Forms of Endangerment of Security of a State

Summary/Abstract: Origins of theoretical elaboration of the nature of social conflicts derive from the Antic age and philosophical attitudes of Heraclites, Plato and Aristoteles. Further development of the thought on conflicts is connected with theological, natural-legal, geopolitical and Malthusian interpretations of social conflicts. However, only with development of sociology and psychology as separate branches of sciences there were developed significant scientific-methodological and theoretical directions and research schools on conflicts. Depending on different factors, in most general sense these approaches are divided into psychological and sociological ones. This division is made on the basis of consideration of the causes of conflicts – whether the causes are in the character of a human being or his/her social structures and institutions, or in other words, whether the conflicts are analyzed on the basis of the perspective of an individual or on the basis of their collective behavior (groups, institutions, communities, cultural systems and similar.) Social conflicts are “large and massive social actions or consciously directed, dynamic and practical mutual confrontations and battles of collective social subjects over significant and by their nature limited resources.” Essence of conflicts as “the states of social interactions and open antagonisms with confrontation and battle as basic directions” are internal-group and inter-group battles with the objective of accomplishment of mutually conflicting interests, values and limited but still important resources. This battle can be “the war without rules, to greater or lesser extent almost always limited by wide social, legal, moral, religious, technical or other norms and rules.” Rebellion can be defined as an organized armed-political battle of which objective may be taking over the governance by a violent upheaval and the change of existing government (governance), while in other case the objectives may be more limited. For example, the efforts of rebels to distance (separate) themselves from the control of the government and to establish an autonomous state within traditional ethic and religious borders. The rebellion’s objective can be taking over limited political concessions which cannot be achieved by implementation of less violent means. Terrorism is an organized implementation of violence or a threat by violence by politically motivated executors who are resolved to impose their will to the government bodies and citizens by causing fear, anxiety, defeatism and panics. Guerilla implies a higher level of violence in comparison with terrorism. Not every guerilla war aims at a social revolution. Guerilla’s objectives can be separation, the change of one political structure, counter-revolution, etc. Guerilla can be defined as a form of combat-organized political activity of small armed and very mobile illegal groups who aspire to represent the interest of the people and who, finding support in the people, collectively use the armed force as direct violence against the government. Civil war is an armed battle between political, national and other antagonistic social groups in one state for purpose of accomplishment of political and economic interests. Significant causes for it can be also accumulation of unsolved social, economic, political and other relations among the peoples. In case of internal conflicts it is very important to timely find out whether it is the word about civil war or some other sort of internal armed conflict. There are many cases in history that internal unrests, uprisings and civil wars, including even military coups and the state coups, were supported from abroad for purpose of accomplishment of interests of great powers or creation of appropriate environment for foreign military intervention – aggression. Most concrete example of encouraging of internal conflicts by some great powers was creation of turbulent state of affairs in Kosovo and Metohija as a vanguard for aggression of the NATO-pact on Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1999.

• Details
• Contents