2024 Conflict Index & 2025 Watchlist

The HDFF team attended the webinar ACLED organized to introduce their 2024 Conflict Index and the 2025 Watchlist. 

Speakers:

• Moderator: Clionadh Raleigh, Director and founder of ACLED
• Katayoun Kishi, Head of Data Science at ACLED
• Andrea Carboni, Head of Analysis at ACLED

The first part of the webinar focused on the introduction of the Conflict Index by Katayoun Kishi. It was created to approach the idea of where the worst conflicts are located in the world. However, the index uses a way to create this index that is not typical. Usually, these indexes focus on the number of events and fatalities. Here, they use a more holistic view and use four indicators: Deadliness, the number of fatalities within four months; Danger, focused on civilians; Diffusion, the geographical diffusion and to what extent the conflict geographically affects the whole country or specific areas; Fragmentation, which accounts for all the non-state armed groups involved. These four factors are equally weighted and cumulated to obtain a 50 countries ranking. These indicators enable ACLED to look at a conflict through a wider lens, one that also enables one to see the specifics around how difficult a conflict is to resolve.

The Index showcases a 25% increase in conflicts and violence across the world, which has doubled in the past five years. The 10 countries ranked as the most violents in 2024 were the following: 

• Palestine, also ranked the most dangerous to civilians and the most geographically diffused.
• Myanmar, the most fragmented.
• Syria
• Mexico
• Nigeria
• Brazil
• Lebanon 
• Cameroon
• Columbia 

It is to be noted that the Ukraine war does not appear in the the top 10, but was ranked the deadliest conflict of 2024. It doesn’t appear higher because in terms of fragmentation and diffusion for example, there are two main actors in the war and it is very located within specific areas. The speaker also emphasized an important aspect of this ranking: the decrease of a country’s ranking can show a slight improvement of the situation of a conflict, but it can also be due to other countries just ranking higher. Columbia, for example, decreased in the top 10 countries throughout 2024, reports indeed showed a slight improvement of the situation, but it mainly was caused by the increase of violence elsewhere. 

Dr Andrea Carboni, then, introduced the conflicts on the watchlist for 2025:

• The Russia-Ukraine war, especially with the re-election of Donald Trump who stated he would solve the conflict quickly.
• The Israel war on Hamas and Hezbollah in Palestine and Lebanon, especially with the prospects of this conflict escalating and extending to the West Bank. 
• The global tensions in the Middle East, and especially because these tensions sit on top of strong domestic conflicts in Syria, Iraq and Yemen. 
• The civil conflicts in Myanmar and Sudan.
• The crises in Pakistan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Sahel, where we witness islamist insurgencies combined with other domestic strikes and international tensions.
• The internal conflicts in Mexico and Columbia.

Dr. Andrea Carboni then followed-up by giving his initial conclusions from these overviews. First, there is a wide variety of conflicts and crises across and within states. Second, these conflicts tend to occur either combined with some other form of domestic unrest, or actually reinforced by each other. He also pointed out the strong transnational factor of these conflicts. Conflicts are now rarely limited to state borders, which creates an intricate network that makes the task of conflict resolution even harder. 

One of the main reasons there has been such an increase in violence in 2024 is because of the war in Ukraine, in Palestine, and in the Middle East. These conflicts started very quickly and continued as intense, or more, as when they started. Which is why conflicts should not be seen as things that start and stop. Conflicts change and evolve as the politics and the environment change simultaneously, which is the reason why we have seen such a consistent rate of violence. They used the case of Syria to illustrate this fact, because it shows the multiple ways in which one same country can experience a myriad of threats simultaneously. Indeed, the country suffered through multiple versions of devastative conflicts, which is a massive challenge for the new government.

The ACLED team also provided an overview of the consequences of Donald Trump’s re-election in the United States. They noted that the reconfiguration of authority, control, and conflict was already happening over the past five years, and this shift may be further influenced by Trump’s administration. Aspiring dictators and “strong-men” are likely to be rewarded for bold policies and human rights violations. Middle powers, rather than dominant ones like the U.S., EU, and China, will gain importance. Conflicts will be driven more by opportunities than ideological agendas. Protest movements will continue, increasingly tied to national economic performance and fiscal health. Unpredictable changes in government leaderships and jihadi groups are expected, such as whether al-Shabaab will expand its role in Somalia and how the Taliban will manage internal fractures. Additionally, the U.S. will likely increase focus on its southern border with Mexico, which could escalate violence.

Questions from the audience

Could al-Shabaab take over Somalia, especially with Donald Trump’s plan to end U.S. military support?
It’s unlikely the U.S. will abruptly stop supporting counter-militant efforts. During Trump’s first term, the U.S. made significant investments, so a full halt seems improbable. Additionally, the African Union-supported coalition in Somalia, backing the government, will likely continue to play a key role, though some shifts may occur.

What role do airstrikes and “remote violence” play in conflicts?
The rise in aerial warfare is due to two factors: states increasingly rely on airstrikes (e.g., Israel’s strikes in Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen) and the proliferation of drones, which armed groups can now manufacture and use. While drones cause less damage than traditional airstrikes, their symbolic impact is still significant.

Why are some conflicts underreported?
Dr. Andrea Carboni notes that conflict coverage has increased overall. International media coverage is often shaped by priorities and what readers can tolerate, leading some conflicts (e.g., in the DRC, Myanmar, Sudan) to be labeled as “forgotten.” However, local media and organizations continue to report on these issues.