When everything is at stake: Understanding support for radical collective actions and collective victimhood through anger in a post-conflict setting

In post-conflict societies, peace and safety often depend on political and economic support from international organizations. But what happens when this support is withdrawn? To investigate this question, we conducted two cross-sectional (N = 832) and one two-wave longitudinal experiment (with waves two weeks apart, Wave 1: N = 416; Wave 2: N = 400) in the post-conflict context of Kosovo, exposing disadvantaged group members (Kosovo Albanians) to information suggesting that relevant organizations (i.e., NATO and the EU) were no longer (vs. still) supporting them. Withdrawal of international support was framed as a psychological experience of perceived abandonment and heightened uncertainty, reinforcing concerns about group security and international exclusion. Results showed that withdrawing either political (NATO) or economic (EU) support independently increased anger toward historical antagonists, support for radical collective action, perceptions of ingroup radicalization, and collective victimhood. Crucially, the combined withdrawal of both intensified these effects, highlighting the interplay between political and economic instability in shaping intergroup attitudes. Anger toward historical antagonists mediated these effects, and the two-wave experiment confirmed that the impact of withdrawn support persisted over time. This article discusses the theoretical and practical implications of these findings for collective action and intergroup relations.