The relationship between natural resource and conflict is very ambiguous and multifaceted. However, the theoretical and empirical literature provided by the various academic studies have supplied ample insights that can help to understand and predict natural resource conflict. But despite the large contribution of these studies, divergence remains among conflict scholars as to what aspect of resource endowment influence the incidence and the duration of the conflict. These cleavages can broadly be divided into two categories of literature: studies related to scarcity conflicts and the research field that links conflict to abundance. The study field related to resource scarcity is split between the resource pessimist argument and the Contra studies contending the optimistic view. But resource abundance literature in revenge has mainly revolved around three distinctive kinds of reviews.
The first wave of papers associate abundance in the natural resource with the blessing (Ginsburg, 1957; Rostow, 1960). The second segment of literature suggests that plentifulness of natural resource is at the root of the slow economic growth and the delay of development in resourcerich nations (Sachs & Warner, 1995). The third sub-literature contends that the dependence on primary commodity export increases the risk and the duration of armed conflicts. However, The thesis surveys the literature and concur with some aspects of the present findings. It takes particular attention to the occurrence and the persistence of large-scale armed conflict such as rebellion.
I argue that there is an assessment gap with regards to largescale armed conflict such as rebellion because greed motivated conflicts have been assessed only from the rebel perspective. Drawing on the rational choice thesis and the general equilibrium theory, I reassess the decision that makes the rebel leader go to war and examine the conflict from the perspective of both belligerents. I start the thesis by addressing the primary question. Does natural resource endowment cause conflict? I discuss the finding which is vague and inconclusive in section (2) and section (3) of the thesis. The second section addresses the case related to resource scarcity conflict while the third section elaborates on resource abundance and conflict. Section (4) gives some insights into the mechanism that facilitate conflict related to resource bonanza and the process of the rebel leader decision making. Furthermore, I study the case of the rebel incursion in Guinea in section (5) to bring into light the exception of the curse of civil war related to the paradox of plenty.
Finally, I give a concluding remark in section (6) 6 2. EVOLUTION OF THE LITERATURE OF RENEWABLE RESOURCE SCARCITY AND THE ONSET OF CONFLICT The notion of resource scarcity was first coined by Thomas Malthus in 1798 to describe the rapid increase in population relative to the scarce natural resource (land). Malthus argues that resource scarcity will lead to greater competition over access to natural resources and to a negative social outcome such as war, disease, as well as famine Malthus (1798). In a simple word, Malthus theory implies that if the human population continue to growth uncontrollably, we will run out of land to produce enough food to feed everyone and the resulting consequence will be chaos. The Malthusians describe this situation as the “Absolut scarcity.” Contrary to high-value commodities such as oil, diamonds and other minerals