Influxes of rural migrant workers add to the tension, as the more traditional rural workers often clash with the more radical urban groups. While some theorists suggest that ethnic differences play a role creating conflict, Sisk argues that conflicts along ethnic lines are actually expressions of deeper insecurities. Given these structural factors, almost any event can serve to trigger violence. Triggering events have included political rallies, strikes, assassinations, random attacks, and even apolitical crimes of passion. To explain the upswing in violence during negotiations, Sisk turns from general structural factors to political conditions.
Transitional negotiations mark a time of great political uncertainty.
There is a lack of defined political rules as the rules of the old regime are rejected, and the rules of the new are yet to be formulated. This is also a time of high expectations by many actors who hope to gain power in the new regime. Sisk finds three basic motives behind this tactical use of political violence. Actors may employ violence in order to derail the negotiation process. This may be the goal of extremists who oppose any compromise.