Previous Issues | AfSol Journal

Regional Intervention in Fragile African States: Comparative Case Studies of South Sudan and Lesotho: Any Lessons Learnt?

African conflicts have continued to be protracted and unresponsive, frustrating conventional interventions. Consequently, the concept of African Solutions for African-Centred Solutions (AfSol) has increasingly become the default alternative. To this end, politico-military crises in South Sudan and Lesotho in 2014 and the interventions by IGAD and SADC respectively, have shown remarkable similarities. South Sudan, saddled with an unclear leadership succession as the country approached the scheduled 2015 national election, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) National Liberation Council convention of December 2013 became a battleground that dragged the country into civil war. Curiously, the same happened in Lesotho when the country was faced with a vote-of-no-confidence in June 2014 and Prime Minister Thomas Thabane dismissed key government officials, prorogued the parliament and removed the Army Commander plunging the country into civil war. When each of the fragile states reached this stage, the sub-regional economic and security organisations (RECs) of IGAD and SADC, respectively, intervened. This paper assesses the implications and impact of those interventions, under the rubric of AfSol in order to discover any lesson learnt. Findings of this case study reveal that the philosophy of AfSol is a possible tool of intervention that could also be extrapolated to other conflict scenarios elsewhere on the African continent.

Ownership at Grassroots Level to Support Regional Commitments: The Case of IGAD and the South Sudan Conflict

The idea of local ownership is regarded as an important pillar for the advancement of African solutions to the continent’s development challenges. While there is consensus as to its importance and demand among practitioners in the peacebuilding field and development in general; the concept still raises a number of questions related to its definition, scope, and feasibility. The paper seeks to analyse the notion of local ownership using the South Sudan conflict that broke out in late December 2013. IGAD’s swift involvement to resolve the conflict gave a sense of hope and commitment by regional leaders towards taking primary responsibility instead of waiting on external help to solve Africa’s peace and security challenges. Whereas external actors were engaged in the peace processes in Addis Ababa, IGAD took the lead as a mediator between the main protagonists. The repeated violations of cessation of hostilities agreements coupled with boycotting of peace talks were reflections of the ‘non-dialogue’ approach taken by the warring parties. In addition, IGAD’s warnings against these violations did not translate into punitive measures against the parties. During the peace process, the belligerent parties were reluctant to allow non-armed stakeholders to participate meaningfully; this revealed the disadvantaged position of civil society and grassroots organisations in relation to peace efforts undertaken at the regional level. Thus the paper recommends the establishment of a framework of guiding principles that would compel actors in peace processes to involve non-armed stakeholders as critical partners. These principles would contribute to concerted efforts that ensure the participation of the African citizenry in order to promote local ownership; a crucial aspect for supporting the commitment of regional leaders in resolving Africa’s peace and security challenges. Without enhancing the capacity of the African citizenry to contribute to and own solutions at the local level, the sustainability of such solutions might be undermined, however afro-centric they might be.

A Case for African-promoted Peacebuilding Strategies with Specific Reference to AMISOM, the Juba Peace Process and IGAD’s interventions in South Sudan

This paper reports the findings of a study that scrutinized the setting, facilitation, actors, content, successes and failures of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), the Juba Peace Process and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD)’s interventions in the ongoing crisis in South Sudan to: 1) reach value judgments on the potential of African solutions to resolve the ongoing conflicts on the African continent; and 2) disaggregate the role of both African and non-African actors in promoting the effectiveness of these solutions. Using evidences from relevant reports and related literature, the study contends that, in concurrence with past authors on the subject, African-promoted peacebuilding efforts have potential for capitalizing on the values those parties in conflict situations share, thereby promoting ownership of and commitment to peaceful resolution. Notwithstanding, the study also reports that these efforts have been associated with constraining limitations, adding that interventions by multi-national organisations are supposedly undertaken to address these limitations. Therefore, the paper argues that interventions into peacebuilding efforts by non-African organisations are to be seen as having pros and cons. Contending that, despite their known shortfalls, African-promoted peacebuilding efforts give better promise of more sustainable peace; the paper propounds—for relevant organisations and policy persons—actionable recommendations towards enhancing the prioritisation and effectiveness of African-promoted peacebuilding strategies.

L’engagement des états Africains en Matière de Sécurité en Afrique Centrale : Contraintes et enjeux de la coopération UA-CEEAC

This article entitled “African states’ engagement in Security in Central Africa: challenges and prospects for cooperation between the AU and ECCAS“ analyses the perception and issues of peace and security dynamics in Central Africa. It also explores the coordination between the AU and ECCAS by questioning its operational efficiency vis-avis the local constraints and crucial challenges in the region. Assuming that States in Central Africa do not offer a shared /relevant vision on issues of peace and security, it is given that the lack of political will mitigates any opportunity of mutual cooperation where Africa can produce its own solutions for its peace and security challenges. Yet, while Eastern and Western African states are highly preoccupied to finding endogenous solutions to security challenges, the Central Africa Region lags behind in mobilizing around common challenges thus the wish for a harmonization/capacity building of already existing institutions. With regards to the knowledge and practice of AfSol, this chapter brings three major contributions that build upon existing achievements: (1) the inventory of endogenous solutions susceptible of capitalizing on the consolidation of peace in Central Africa; (2) incentives for decision makers in Central Africa for a more active engagement for peace and (3) the establishment of a platform of discussion between academic circles, pan-African structures of integration and political decision makers.

AMISOM and African-Centred Solutions to Peace and Security Challenges

The success of the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) seems to vindicate emerging scholarly and policy optimism regarding Africa’s potential to solve its peace and security problems through Africa-centred responses. To explain this African-led intervention’s success–despite Africa’s apparent institutional and resource limitations and in the context of the 1992-93 US-led Operation Restore Hope’s failures–this desk-based inquiry underlines the commitment, shared values, and ownership that typify AMISOM. I advance an “African-Centred Solutions” (AfSol) perspective that is rooted in Afro-optimist analyses which, basing on Africa’s past dealings with foreign actors, argues that “borrowed fists” cannot solve Africa’s security problems. Evidently, unlike non-Africa-centred interventions, AMISOM relied on the AfSol approach whose pillars–genuine commitment, shared Pan-African values, and a sense of ownership–engendered its success by incentivising states to withstand the Mission’s costs and to tirelessly mobilise foreign support. Throughout, Africans incorporated and reflected AfSol principles, by: initiating the Mission-building upon IGAD’s efforts; persisting amidst the Mission’s human, resource, and politico-security costs; involving both local and foreign Somalis; and integrating disparate intervention programmes into a single, AU-sanctioned Mission. AMISOM’s success underscores the need to harness Africa’s potential to address its peace and security challenges.

Responsibility to Protect in Kenyan and Darfur Crises: A Critical Deconstruction of the Ideology of AfSol in the Lens of R2P, Normative International Relations Theory, and the Jetliners-Rigs Approach for Peacebuilding and Conflict Resolution

Morality, trust, social ties, shared institutions, and social capital are in short supply after ethnic wars: ethnic identity is prominent; attachment to collective myths and symbols offensive to other groups is strong; avoidance is legitimate; minority returnees are not welcome; and disputants harbour deep-seated grievances. How can peace and culture of tolerance be nurtured in such a social milieu? (Oberschall, 2007:231).

The statement above represents the challenge of this research. Studies indicate that African conflicts are rooted in complex constructions and conjectures of the continent’s political economies, social identities, and cultural ecologies, each of which is derived from local, national, and regional historical experiences and patterns of engagement with an ever changing world system (Nhema and Zeleza, 2008). These conflicts threaten regional stability, destroy human lives as well as social and physical infrastructure, and place at risk minorities’ fundamental freedoms and human rights. Such a precarious state of events calls for timely and informed interventions to mitigate conflict protraction and virulence. Studies indicate that a civic culture of tolerance and respect for minorities is not conceivable without truth and justice in human affairs (Oberschall, 2007). Therefore, the proliferation of intrastate conflicts around the world has led to the emergence of transitional justice mechanisms which respond to legacies of collective violence and systematic human rights violations in a bid to establish the truth about the past, determine accountability, and offer some form of redress (Van Der Merwe, et al., 2009).

This study investigates the perception and/or experiences of the respondents about ethno-political violence, transitional justice, and peacebuilding in Kenya. Kenyan ethno-political challenge led to the formation of the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission of Kenya (TJRC) and the intervention of the International Criminal Court (ICC) both of which are highly critiqued by a section of Kenyans for their inadequacy to address the Kenyan problem (Rugene, 2010; Barasa, 2009; Omtata, 2010). Indigenous approaches to peacebuilding, which are thought to be complimentary forces to the ICC and TJRC have their merits and demerits too.

This study indicates that neither the dualistic model of TJRC and the ICC nor the Tripartite Hybridity of TJRC, ICC, and indigenous approaches to peacebuilding is adequate enough in facilitating transitional justice in Kenya. To complement the gaps of the dualistic and tripartite approaches, this study has come up with an experience-based grounded model for transitional justice, peacebuilding and conflict resolution in Kenya informed by the expressed needs and the recommendations of the study participants. Apart from having the tripartite hybridity of TJRC, ICC, and indigenous approaches to peacebuilding, the new model emphasizes the importance of implementing institutional and policy frameworks that would address historical injustices and structural violence ingrained in the Kenyan system in order to mitigate ethno-political violence in the future. If well implemented, the new Kenyan model namely The JET LINERS-RIGS Grounded Approach for peacebuilding and conflict resolution is expected to nurture sustainable peacebuilding, conflict resolution, and transitional justice in Kenya.

Economic Integration as a Peacebuilding Strategy in the Horn of Africa with Particular Focus on Ethiopia and Its Four Neighbours

The quest for peace is a longstanding objective of national governments and development partners in the Horn of Africa. Political negotiations between conflicting parties and the promotion of regional economic integration spearheaded by the sub-regional economic communities are among the most prominent attempts by member states and their partners with the objective of promoting regional peace. However, peace is still illusive in the region. This paper suggests the adoption of an incremental peace project spearheaded by limited sectorial cross-border cooperation. It summarizes the main theoretical approaches to cross- border cooperation and provides a summary of the current political environment of the region, highlighting its defining features. It further reviews the European Union experience, for comparative reasons, which may inform us the way forward, based on the key lessons from that experience.

African-Centred Solutions for Peace and Security (AfSol) Report

The Institute for Peace and Security Studies (IPSS) assembled a group of experts for a workshop on African-centred Solutions in Peace and Security (AfSol) from 26 to 27 September 2014. The objective of the workshop was to define and refine the concept of AfSol through presentations followed by in-depth discussions and debates. The discussions led to a common understanding on certain issues while, in others, it unveiled new dimensions of AfSol and pointed to areas of further research. The areas where the experts have reached on a common understanding namely: ownership, commitment and shared values, will serve as common ground to future discussions and researches.