Section 2 - Content Structure
2.1 - Structure of Insurgency Reports
In order to mitigate accidental bias or 'framing' techniques as much as possible, all of our Insurgency Reports follow the same structure. This structure is outlined below.
Insurgency Overviews are simple introductions to our Insurgency Reports. They have no direct substantial value; they serve as overviews with the goal of familiarising the reader with the general actions, ideology, and approaches used by a group.
History & Foundations
Despite our focus on contemporary security studies, understanding the modern mechanisms of a group requires some historical background knowledge. This section is dedicated to a relevant historical overview of any relevant conflicts (as most insurgencies arise amidst periods of conflict or war) and the general founding events of a group's motivations.
Importantly, our coverage of a group's history is in no way an attempt to address the entire history of a relevant conflict. Our primary focus remains on the insurgency itself, and hence our framework concentrates on the history of the group itself. Histories of relevant conflicts and battles are relatively brief and are solely included to build up the history of a group's ideological foundations.
Objectives & Ideology
This section focuses on the source of the movement in question. At The Modern Insurgent, we prioritise the extent to which our work can help readers understand political struggle. Doing this requires a deep political analysis of a group's motives, ideology, and the potential presence of a particular sentiment relevant to their uprising.
This section is one of the most susceptible to bias, as it frames the reasons behind a group's willingness to revolt. Henceforth, our editorial board places additional attention when reviewing it. As a whole, we ensure that the sources we cite in this section are not biased and do not come from first-level stakeholders. For example, an article on a Kurdish militia group would not cite a Kurdish, Turkish, Syrian, nor Iraqi source in the 'Objectives & Ideology' section. However, we may occasionally cite first-level stakeholders to highlight how the group itself portrays its own objectives and reasons to revolt (as this is part of understanding their political struggle).
We value and cherish our impartiality and sincerely commit to outlining the ideologies of groups in the fairest, most unbiased ways possible. Moreover, our use of political theory and political labels (i.e 'far-left', 'far-right') are based on their theoretical definitions, and not their relative country-specific interpretations.
Political & Military Capabilities
The fourth sections of our Reports focus on the political and/or military capabilities of a group. In order to evaluate their regional or local influence, it is fundamental to grasp a group's militant potential. Depending on the nature of the group in question, our authors may wish to focus on its political or military capabilities (or both). In many cases, some groups are solely 'political', per se, whereas others are significantly more militant ('military' or 'paramilitary').
Approach to Resistance
Section 05 is perhaps one of the most important within our Insurgency Reports, for it elaborates on a group's nature and on the approach it employs to materialise its political struggle. This section determines whether a group is 'red' or 'blue' on our colour-index. Whole some groups may be more violent and their approaches to resistance involve direct force, arms, and/or have led to casualties, their approach to resistance leans towards the 'red' colour-index. However, some groups are less violent and adapt more political, legal ways of protesting (and this would classify them as 'blue' groups).
Importantly, the name of this section does not suggest that all groups are 'resisting'. The Modern Insurgent condemns extremism and reiterates that it is solely a scholarly/academic database of movements from around the world. Some of these movements are significantly more radical and extreme than others, and the name of this section does not in any way aim to legitimise some groups' offences as acts of 'resistance'.
Relations & Alliances
In order to understand regional dynamics and get a better understanding of how insurgencies interact (either in positive, negative, or neutral ways), covering a group's relations and alliances is crucial. Some groups have significantly more local alliances (if any), while some interact internationally. This is why the name of this section will vary from article to article.
As our Reports use credible sources and refer to primary (especially OSINT) and secondary sources of information, we commit to complete transparency. This is why we list our sources at the bottom of each Insurgency Report. Moreover, we allow our writers to choose their preferred citation style. While many of our writers use theChicago citation style, some also use MLA and APA. The objective is not to enforce a non-flexible constraint to our writers, but rather enable them to demonstrate their research through their favourite citation styles.
2.2 - Structure of News & Analysis
Our News & Analysis articles follow less strict guidelines. Although we prioritise objectivity and non-speculation to the same extent as in our Insurgency Reports, we allow our writers to approach their analysis from the perspective they desire.
Speculation is not the goal of these articles. Although educated and logical predictions can be made, they are not necessarily encouraged and they do not reflect any of the writers' opinions, values, or convictions.
The objective our N&A pieces is to inform the reader about turning events in global affairs that involve insurgencies or political groups. Our writers are talented scholars and their analytical abilities are a pivotal determinant in their authorship here at The Modern Insurgent.
2.3 - Structure of Interviews
Our interviews with various members of insurgencies or political movements are purely informational. They do not have an intent to frame the interviewee in any way. Our questions will vary depending on the interviewee in question, but most of them will involve the stakeholder's actions, determinations, challenges, and personal stories.
Additionally, we are not responsible for the structures of external podcasts who have invited us on their episodes.