| How do governments organize internal power? What are the consequences of these actions for human rights? I explore the creation, evolution and repercussions of the state's organization of internal security, centering on the national government's competing needs to maximize control over security and minimize costs. I argue that legacies of violence influence the state's organization of internal armed forces and the subsequent effects of those organizations. Counterinsurgency campaigns and anti-colonial wars lead to the creation and expansion of local security, allowing governments with limited capacity and limited local area knowledge to engage in irregular warfare and population-centric operations. However, governments using local forces during domestic operations may be unable to demobilize them; these forces can remain long after wars end. The short-term strategic benefits of local security forces undermine prospects for an enduring peace. In addition, I show that limited democratic constraints on national leaders will unintentionally encourage them to adopt centralized but publicly unaccountable security. This organization of force provides national leaders with the capability and command authority to engage in widespread repression against their own population. I test these arguments using an original global dataset on internal security forces that covers 198 countries from 1970 through 2011. The organization of internal security ultimately emerges from factors historical and immediate, domestic and international, and has lasting consequences on citizens within the state. |
