Whereas ANC–IFP hostilities represent the defining feature of transition-era conflict on the Rand, a diversity of armed, non-state groups operated with different political orientations, mandates, compositions and relationships with police. The most widespread of these armed entities fell under the loose heading of SDUs. These militias were associated with the ANC, but their relationships with the party varied greatly. It became clear that the ANC had little, if any, control over many SDUs, and it was never able to resolve this problem. Moreover, ANC-aligned structures fought with each other and against AZAPO and PAC activists. As IFP hostels became militarised, all male residents were expected to participate in the defence of the hostels while some younger men were slotted into special fighting units. IFP authority in the hostels was more centralised than ANC authority in the townships, but some IFP militants also engaged in violence that did not further party interests. In his examination of ‘ethnic wars’ in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, John Mueller argues that ‘rather than reflecting deep, historic passions and hatreds, the violence seems to have been the result of a situation in which common, opportunistic, sadistic and often distinctly nonideological marauders were recruited and permitted free rein by political authorities’. Similar circumstances developed in many transition-era townships. Political rivalries and objectives were paramount on the macro level, but acquisitive criminality and local antagonisms often determined conflict on the ground. The common feature shared by all these armed groups was their capacity for violence and the conviction that violence was an effective tool for navigating the challenges of this perilous period.