This study explores and critically examines the role of indigenous mechanisms (the Inter-Tribal Reconciliation Conferences-ITRCs) in resolving tribal conflicts in South Darfur State of Western Sudan. The fundamental question raised by this study is: have these reconciliation conferences- 1989-2009- been able to address the root causes of the tribal conflicts and are they capable of serving the same role that they once did? Tribal leadership structures, such as Native Administration (NA) and their mechanisms of conflict resolution/management in Darfur, have been subjected to highly significant changes over time. The question is to what extent these changes further fuelled tribal conflicts and/or have negatively affected the capability of the NA and the ITRCs to deal with these conflicts? This thesis relies on archive records and reports of the ITRCs and data generated through interviews conducted with key informants. Through a detailed analysis the study: 1) presents a detailed account of the major conflicts and their causes in South Darfur; 2) identifies the changing identities of the protagonists and of the perceived causes; 3) assesses the effectiveness of the agreements reached by these conferences when considered alongside the causes identified. Analysis of the ITRCs shows that tribal conflicts in Darfur (from1980s), and South Darfur in particular, were connected to the wider political conflict in the Sudan and the region respectively. The analysis suggests that the history of neglect/marginalisation of the region by successive governments, and the political manipulation of the NA and local government, have negatively affected the performance of these institutions. The experience of the ITRCs indicates that they were unable to address the underlying causes of the tribal conflicts, such as land disputes, the manipulation of the NA and local government, rape and mass killings.

The current scholarly literature on the international mediation of armed conflicts predominantly draws on a rationalist-materialist perspective. This perspective suggests that the ticket to mediation success is the material manipulation of the bargaining environment by third parties with a high degree of economic and military resources. In this dissertation I argue against those that highlight material power when explaining outcomes of international mediation processes. Indeed, this dissertation shows that legitimacy, far more than capacity, determines outcomes of mediation. The reason why legitimacy matters so much is that if a mediator has legitimacy, it can continue to look for a mutual satisfactory outcome and try to pull the conflict parties towards compliance, but if a mediator loses legitimacy, no amount of material resources will prove sufficient in mediating the conflict. In other words, material capacity in the form of economic and military resources may be useful to successfully mediate a conflict, but it is rarely sufficient. Through scrutinising international mediation processes in civil wars in Africa, I develop a theory that explains how mediators are effective because of a high degree of legitimacy rather than military or economic capacity. More specifically, I show how legitimacy matters through comparing the effectiveness of African and non-African third parties. African third parties are typically referred to as ineffective because of a low degree of economic and military capacity. However, African third parties are effective in mediating civil wars in Africa because of a high degree of legitimacy, which is a result of a strong conviction within the African society of states that African mediation is the most desirable type of mediation in conflicts in Africa. Drawing on data from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program supplemented with unique data, which together cover all mediation efforts in Africa between 1960 and 2012, I find quantitative evidence supporting the effectiveness of African third parties. Compared to non-African third parties, African third parties are far more likely to conclude peace agreements and these peace agreements are more likely to be durable. Two case studies, in which several mediation efforts in civil wars in Sudan are examined, further probe the causal mechanisms that I put forward to explain the effectiveness of African mediation. While I do not claim causal generalisability on the basis of these two case studies, the mediation efforts in Sudan nevertheless suggest that third party legitimacy is central to mediation success. This is the first systematic study that compares African and non-African mediation efforts. Theoretically, this study deviates from much of the literature that solely puts forward rationalist-materialist explanations of mediation success. By bringing legitimacy to the forefront, this dissertation overcomes key limitations in the current mediation literature, in which material sources of power are emphasised and social structures are ignored.

This dissertation scrutinises two related claims that were particularly heightened in 2009 as the European Union (EU) was celebrating the first tenth anniversary of its European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), the implementing arm of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). First, the two policy frameworks allegedly embodied sufficient added value for bettering EU intervention for human protection purposes in third places. Second, the ESDP supposedly enabled the EU to make a difference in its response to two bloody wars that broke out in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo) successively in 1996 and 1998. This thesis argues that the alleged added value and difference have been overstated at best. While various studies have taken a similar position, they have important shortcomings for at least four reasons: lack of a comprehensive account of the CFSP motives, capacities, and response; exclusive focus on civil and military operations; focus on the post-Second Congo War period; and a lack of conceptual clarity regarding two key terms – ‘conflict resolution’ and ‘peacebuilding’. This thesis goes beyond generalisation and undertakes a forensic examination of the CFSP statements, decisions, and actions precisely through the lens of Conflict Resolution (CR): a specific subject area of study with its own normative, theoretical, and practical advantages and shortcomings; and with a more comprehensive and indeed seminal conceptualisation of peacebuilding. The outcome is a far more nuanced assessment of failure and success of the EU’s peace endeavours in this context than can be obtained through a broad-brush approach to analysis.

No description available.

This study generates a metatheory of interpersonal violence from an initial qualitatively highest scoring academic literature item and theoretically sampling over 200 additional literature items using classic grounded theory methodological analysis and synthesis. Danger emerged as the main concern of those experiencing interpersonal violence. Safetifying from interpersonal violence through the socio-psychophysical process of Phasic Protective Sequencing emerged as the resolution of the main concern. The metatheory of safetifying emerged in four parts: 1. The first was the socio-structural process of endangering with interpersonal violence through the interaction of the people and the elite resulting in endangerment (danger). 2. Danger precipitates the socio-psychological process of safetifying before interpersonal violence which involves awarenessing, setting up, and evaluating. 3. If the person is attacked, it precipitates the psycho-physical process of safetifying during interpersonal violence including resiliencing, finishing, and victoring. 4. The aftermath of an attack or the avoidance of an attack precipitates the psycho-social process of safetifying after interpersonal violence including reclaiming, relinquishing, and achieving. The metatheory of safetifying was shown to contribute uniquely to the field of interpersonal violence, to many related theories, and to have potential for therapeutic application. / Psychology / M.A. (Psychology)

This thesis is a study of the impact of militarisation, conflict and Small Arms and Light Weapons (SALW) proliferation on women and children amongst the pastoralist communities of North East Africa. It explores the way pastoralists communities' lives have changed over the decades with the introduction of SALW to make cattle rustling a lethal pastime that involves all members of society but with implications for the vulnerable population caught between warring groups. The study delves into the variety of options facing them, such as the fact that the dangers posed by introduction of SALW in turn militarises the vulnerable population caught between being helpless bystanders or taking up arms to defend their herds or else perish from hunger when the remaining stock are stolen at gunpoint. After an introductory chapter examining thematic issues involved in the complex web knitted by militarisation, conflict, SALW proliferation, cattle rustling and pastoralist communities, the thesis examines circumstances surrounding the need to wage war on neighbours in cattle raids pitting pastoralist communities' against governments interested in the pursuit of politics that disfavour their interests. The following chapters examine various aspects of this complex militarisation/SALW proliferation/cattle rustling web placing it in the context of the subsequent implications for both the pastoralist communities' vulnerable population and the security of the entire region. It delves into ways the vulnerable population is impacted upon with a view to show that the side effects have far-reaching implications for the pastoralists and citizens of the states they belong to. We analyse existing efforts to combat proliferation and instruments aimed at protecting the vulnerable population in armed conflict with a view to ascertain their strengths and challenges. We finally examine possible ways out of the quagmire resulting from the marriage between SALW proliferation and cattle rustling and conclude by offering policy recommendations.