Talk:Internal conflict in Peru

Military history: South America / Cold War / Post-Cold War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	South American military history task force
	Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989)
	Post-Cold War task force

Peru Top‑importance

This article is supported by WikiProject Peru. This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.PeruWikipedia:WikiProject PeruTemplate:WikiProject PeruPeru

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Peru To-do:

Assess and prioritise articles (log)
Check for copyvios at Special:Contributions/Priscilla D, tag as {{Db-copyvio}} where appropriate
Create:
Expand: new articles; top importance articles
FAC / FLC: Peru national football team
GAN:
Merge requests: Amazonas before the Inca Empire, Chachapoyas culture
Review: Shining Path, Universitario de Deportes
Translate: National University of San Marcos
Work on Lima, the current article improvement drive
Wikify: articles needing attention

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 1000 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by if there are more than 4.

Template Documentation

Hello! I think this article could use an SVG picture of the current military situation, as the internal conflict war is still ongoing, as most articles with ongoing wars have template documentation. Thanks! WonderWeirdo (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The war ended in 2000. I think that this article should be separated with the more current remnant attacks. JD John M. Turner (talk) 23:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update needed

The reference for the conflict lasting to the present is 20 years old. 82.36.70.45 (talk) 14:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus (defaulting to last stable title prior to move war). There does not appear to be any consensus on either of the current or the suggested title. I note that the last stable title Internal conflict in Peru was adopted following a consensus in RM, see #Requested move above, and that title had been stable for ~12 yrs from 2012 to 2024. Therefore, defaulting back to the last the last stable title, per WP:TITLECHANGES. WP:MOVEWAR is extremely disruptive, and I request everyone to refrain from it, and feel free to make their case via WP:RM. (closed by non-admin page mover) —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 14:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peruvian Civil War of 1980–2000 → Peruvian conflictPeruvian conflict – This article has been repeatedly moved without consensus in what appears to be an edit war. I think the name it had prior to this was the most fitting but I welcome discussion. Charles Essie (talk) 05:30, 19 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Raladic (talk) 19:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Frost 11:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Peruvian conflict" is too vague. Needs dates at least. Srnec (talk) 02:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, there are many similar articles that don't have dates (Afghan conflict, Colombian conflict, Iraqi conflict, Myanmar conflict, ect.). Charles Essie (talk) 04:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd move every one of those. The idea that "Afghan conflict" is clear but "War in Afghanistan" ambiguous is especially absurd. Srnec (talk) 21:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be willing to accept Peruvian conflict (1980–present) as a compromise. I would also be willing to accept the current title if the second phase is split into a separate article like the one in Spanish Wikipedia. Charles Essie (talk) 03:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. per Srnec

JD John M. Turner (talk) 03:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about Peruvian conflict (1980–present) or Peruvian Civil War (1980–present)? Charles Essie (talk) 16:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Peru and WikiProject Military history have been notified of this discussion. Raladic (talk) 19:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 'Peruvian conflict' is unbelievable vague—blindlynx 23:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What about Peruvian conflict (1980–present) or Peruvian Civil War (1980–present)? Charles Essie (talk) 16:32, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
either of those work—blindlynx 20:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We could also keep the current title and split the second phase into a separate article like they've done in Spanish Wikipedia. Charles Essie (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisting comment: To discuss the alternative title (Peruvian conflict (1980–present)) Frost 11:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support' - Shining Path insurgency (which redirects here) or, if not that, Peruvian conflict. Shining Path insurgency is preferable because this is how sources appear to refer to this conflict (e.g., this, this ) No to using years basically per what I said at Iraq conflict and Afghan conflict, because the real issue here is a sourcing issue - reliable sources saying that the same conflict that began in 1980 is continuing today are lacking, and without that you cannot fix a date covering today in the title. People need to accept that insurgencies don't typically end with a peace treaty or a surrender due to splinter organisations, and as such it can be impossible to define a point where they actually end, instead they just tail off and become part of the background violence and criminality within a country, and for this reason it is better not to fix the idea that they have ended or not ended in the title of the article unless there is strong sourcing for doing so. FOARP (talk) 12:58, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Shining Path was never the only faction involved and at its pretty much fallen apart in recent years while the conflict continues. Charles Essie (talk) 21:05, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"the conflict" - which conflict? If it is not a conflict involving the Shining Path, then it is not the conflict described in this article. The most recent event described in the timeline here occurred in 2023 and is ascribed to unidentified "terrorists" in VRAEM. Is there anything even from this year?

But then this article does cover armed conflict after 2000, so using 2000 as an end-date doesn't seem reasonable either. In that case, better just to not have any dates fixed in the title. FOARP (talk) 23:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that was my original proposal. Charles Essie (talk) 23:50, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, and like I said, I'd prefer your proposal to the current title, but I think the article needs to be fixed to something a bit more definite than simply conflict involving Peru. Since the article begins with the Shining Path and focuses largely on them, and since reliable sources appear to follow that, it doesn't seem unreasonable to mention the Shining Path in the title. FOARP (talk) 08:27, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is widely reported that the conflict ended in 2000.
JD John M. Turner (talk) 21:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We could always split the article. Charles Essie (talk) 21:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ambiguous support for a solution along the lines of what FOARP lays out, arguments here really need to ground themselves in how the sources address the(se) topic(s). Like it or not, RS often assign vague names to conflicts, especially those which include aspects of insurgency. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 14:40, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would also lean towards FOARP's suggestions, given the fact that dates seem to be disputed and putting any on the article feels weird, but I also do share concerns that "Peruvian conflict" is horribly vague. A Shining Path–based title seems reasonable, especially as multiple recent attacks are attributed to remnants of the Shining Path. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support a move, not too keen on where though. Might I also suggest the possibility of Communist insurgency in Peru? Yue🌙 06:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem there is that some the insurgents adhere to the decidedly non-communist ideology of Ethnocacerism. Charles Essie (talk) 06:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Post move discussion

I support the move to Peruvian internal conflict as an improvement over the previous title. However, I would still prefer a title that centres the Shining Path, otherwise what we have is an article that attempts to be about every internal conflict within Peru from 1980 onwards, but these are not a single topic and are not all treated as a single topic by reliable sources. The article plainly states that that Tupac Amaru played only a minor role, and barely discusses any other party. FOARP (talk) 09:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Military history perspective

This article needs attention from an expert in military history. The specific problem is: The Peruvian Civil War of 1980–2000 is not the same as the ongoing Peruvian conflict. It seems that both topics have been combined in this article. While there is some continuity—such as the presence of remnants of the Shining Path—the contemporary conflict in Peru is more about socio-environmental issues and narco-terrorism than the revolutionary ideology that defined the civil war
— Special:Permalink/1269936410

Hi I have added some analysis on the conflict by two historians of particular note to the talk page and the discussion of if the two conflicts are linked is Blakes conclusion that the Peruvian military won but did not have to address the underlying socio economic conditions that created the conflict - because of x,y,z weakness of shining path.

At least given that I think it does add to a link between the conflicts.

At least from what I read much of the latter article reads only as a new bulletin of events e.g one nurse being kidnapped and sadly killed or one attack on a checkpoint happening.

I'm not sure if the latter events match the scope first half in terms of relevance perhaps there is a bias to including them because they are reported on and easily accessible because of global media. But compared to the first portion which is about a conflict that killed at least 70k people it does feel like a very sharp change in scope and focus especially when the same amount of granularity is no where close to being matched wrt to the initial insurgency.

The scale of the insurgency is much reduced perhaps an article split would be appropriate even if connected by broad causes.

Perhaps the latter section could be its own article, this article retaining only major events and a short paragraph outlining that an insurgency had resumed.

Best regards, LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 22:44, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. In the Spanish-speaking branch, we have separated the two articles. Although the most recent phase comes from the conflict of the 80s, it doesn't maintain the same intensity nor the same ideological motivations. Previously it was a conflict derived from the Cold War, now it's only problems with drug trafficking.

I hope this suggestion will be taken into account.

Sincerely, LtPsyche. LtPsyche (talk) 01:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

200,000 killed & executed figure

does anyone have a source for this and indeed any of the other non sourced numbers in the info box,

Blake says "as many as 70,000 Peruvians were killed throughout the insurgency" at least to my reading that's a total of all groups, security forces, military and civilian. And a 200,000 number seems very suspect to me at least given the sources I read that emphasised that many insurgents accepted amnesties. Thus 200,000 out of 235,000 killed seems very off/

This BBC article BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Profile: Peru's Shining Path provides the same number.

Is this sufficient to change the infobox?

Again best regard, LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I followed the source for the 70k killed civilian claim and this is what machine translation gives me;

---

"the total number of dead and disappeared caused by the Peruvian internal armed conflict can be estimated at 69,280 people, within a 95% confidence interval whose upper and lower limits are 61,007 and 77,552, respectively.

Of this total, actions by the Shining Path would have caused 46% of the total number of victims, that is, approximately 31,331 people. While 24% would have been provoked by agents of the State and 24% by other circumstances such as peasant patrols, paramilitary groups and armed confrontations."

---

Again it seems to me this is not civilian deaths but instead all deaths - especially the words armed conformation appears to suggest that the 24% refers to deaths resulting from combatant on combatant fighting eg gov vs insurgency or peasant patrol vs insurgency

But I dont speak spanish so if someone here does I would be glad if someone could check both the RPP news article where I got the quotes from and the final report.

LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 23:10, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@38.43.130.89

do you have a source for the 200,000 dead rebels claims to are adding?

do you have a source for the 235,000 rebel combatants?

The text of the article gives its strength at 500, and another source a think tank on crime and policing gives their peak at 3,000

--

Beyond that you have the text of the final report, the BBC article and the machine translated Spanish news article all saying 70,000 dead of all types your claims of 200,000+ seem unbelievable LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 05:10, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shining Path - thats the 3,000 at peak figure - quite some distance from the 200,000 claim you are adding LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 05:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

“POW” descriptions in infobox

These are inappropriate, right? It was an internal conflict, these people were arrested for violating the law, they don’t/didn’t have legal status as POWs. Prezbo (talk) 07:33, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thats a really good point! should it be changed to captured? LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 23:52, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably. I went ahead and did this. Prezbo (talk) 12:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I just noticed this discussion today, I changed your edit and re-added the POW templates a while back as I believed they were remnants of machine translations of the Spanish Wiki (which has a number of issues on its own) while also hoping to change the infobox's format to be less cluttered, something much more apparent to non-registered and mobile readers. Is there perhaps a "captured" template? The POW one was the closest I could find. AlejandroFC (talk) 02:59, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a "captured" template afaik. I would still argue that it's better to clutter the infobox than to present inaccurate information. But I'm not a fan of infoboxes in general. I do wonder whether this issue has been discussed in relation to other conflicts? Prezbo (talk) 12:27, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the shear number of captured commanders - potentially this is information that might be useful to convey in the infobox could we change POW to (captured)? either that or dates in which they were active and cheers @AlejandroFC it makes sense how these changes came about LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 13:04, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the POW template to the Surrender template while linking to the article for imprisonment. Hopefully this is good until an incarceration template is created. Perhaps there is a proper place on this website to propose such a template? AlejandroFC (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers the surrender template looks fine to me at least, what do you and @Prezbo think about the Manner of death - Wikipedia links, honestly I am none too keen, the MOS:MILINFOBOX style guide says much info box content is at the discretion of editors

But my view would be is confusing to list natural deaths not resulting from the conflict and does add to some of the infobox clutter LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 14:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you refer to what the template links to, I think it's fine as there is no "natural death" page. Regarding the natural deaths, I've listed them due to the ongoing nature of the conflict. AlejandroFC (talk) 14:24, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the deaths arent a result of the conflict and dont belong in the article let alone the infobox

Perhaps the one exception might be Abimael Guzmán's death because it is discussed at length at different points of the article was clearly quite impactful on the conflict LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 14:27, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason I didn't get notified of your reply. I updated the infobox with your suggested edits, among other changes. I'll continue working on the rest of the article's formatting soon, as there are some details to be fixed (such as non-existent links, for example). AlejandroFC (talk) 20:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AlejandroFC (Pinged for information)

@Eddu16

Eddu why did you you re-add the 200,000 type numbers of shining path strength and casualties? please see the above discussion

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Internal_conflict_in_Peru&direction=next&oldid=1279396798

I have once again purged them from the infobox. This is the third time, if you are desperate to include them please proceed via dispute resolution - for the avoidance of doubt I object to those numbers as unrealistic and unsourced. LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 14:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddu16 LeChatiliers Pupper (talk) 15:50, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just noticed that this user has—quite honestly—vandalised a large number of pages. I wanted to know if there is a way to revert all of this non-manually. Does he ever reply to any messages so as to not report him? I undid an edit of his here but I'm not 100% sure if the page is as it was when I last saw it. I also left a message on his talk page.

Please ping me on my talk page if possible, as the last two times I was mentioned here I didn't get any notifications. Thanks in advance. AlejandroFC (talk) 23:42, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]