The use of federalism as an integral component in post-conflict statebuilding processes is becoming increasingly common (e.g. Iraq, Yemen & Sri Lanka). The current academic literature, however, is divided between those that argue that federalism in such fragile environments will increase the likelihood of secession and ‘balkanisation’ and that those that argue that only federalism can provide the periphery with constitutionally protected rights against the centre. However, currently there is little empirical evidence to support either view. This research seeks to contribute to this gap by assessing whether the recent introduction of federalism in Somalia since 2013 has led to the delivery of tangible governance and peacebuilding outcomes. This thesis specifically focuses on the federalism process in Jubaland, a state which formed in 2013. Data was gathered across the region using a statistically significant perception survey and was supplemented by Key Informant Interviews. The surveys were designed to assess public opinion towards federalism and understand how its introduction was perceived to have impacted local governance and conflict dynamics. This analysis was further extended to assess the impact of federalism in other federal member states including Puntland, Galmadug and Southwest based on a review of available secondary literature. An analytical framework assessed the strength of Federal Government-Federal Member State, intra-state and inter-state relations and the extent to which a particular state had undertook tangible governance reforms. The key findings of the research indicate that the population in Jubaland is strongly supportive of federalism in principle and the manner in which it has been implemented. Federalism was seen by the majority of the population as a way of maintaining Somali unity whilst protecting local interests and meeting ocal needs. The approach of the Jubaland authorities to adopt a consociational approach to governance led to the establishment of a sustainable political settlement and the inclusion of minority groups for the first time. However, these successes have not been experienced more widely across Somalia. Other federal member states have experienced poor relations with the federal government. Internally, some states also have weak and violent relations with groups who are competing for influence and poor external relationships with other federal member states. In general, there is a low commitment to governance reform at federal-state level. These findings underpin the final conclusion that whilst federalism in Somalia has enabled improved governance and peacebuilding outcomes in Jubaland, it is the manner of how federal governance has been implemented in other federal states that explains the disparity in results across the country as a whole. More widely, this research suggests that federalism in post-conflict contexts is neither a panacea for peace and stability, or in of itself, a catalyst for inevitable fragmentation.

No description available.

This study aims to critically understand the involvement of external actors, most notably Kenya and Ethiopia in the Somali conflict. It also aims to discuss peace prospect for Somalia in consideration with regional interest. Adopting Mary Kaldor’s “New War” theory that explains the changing context and transnational character of wars in the new era, and Michael E. Brown’s concept of causes and Regional Dimensions of Internal Conflict in combination with applied peace and conflict research method, the study finds that the involvement of neighbouring states, particularly Kenya and Ethiopia, in the Somali conflict is necessitated by the “spill-over” effect of the internal conflict coupled with transnational threats posed to their national security by various local and international actors. Furthermore, the study reveals that Somalia’s conflict hosts a variety of politically, religiously and militarily motivated external actors, who also openly vowed to internationalize their activities. As a result, the connections between local actors in Somalia and terrorist groups operating elsewhere, but cooperating with them, have become a source of continuous instability to Somalia, the eastern African region and beyond. This situation makes an international action imperative as the prospect for peace in Somalia is still in place. Thus, in order to to end wars and create a durable peace in Somalia, this study suggests Michael E. Brown’s ‘co-optation’ and ‘neutralization’ strategies along with an extensive international efforts including humanitarian assistance and local institutions building, which may help to restore peace, rule of law and ensure long term stability in Somalia.

Denna studie ämnar ta reda på om den humanitära interventionen i Somalia, mellan åren 1993-1995 kan anses vara humanitär eller inte, enligt Nicholas J Wheelers solidaritetsteori. Först undersöks om UNSOM II passar in i solidaritetsteorin kriterier och därefter förklaras varför. Resultat från ovanstående undersökning kommer att ge en bättre bild av UNSOM II och hjälpa till med att förklara faktorer som kan spela roll om en humanitär intervention benämns humanitär. Materialet som används i denna uppsats är utvärderingar och rapporter från åren, publicerade av Förenta Nationerna, Amnesty International och Human Rights Watch. Denna studie fann att UNSOM II inte var humanitär i relation till solidaritetsteorin, med hänsyn till bristen av proportionerlig användning av våld under jakten på Aydid. Dessutom var de nådda resultaten inte tillräckliga för att betecknas som humanitära. Några lärdomar från operationen kan dock bli användbara i andra delar av världen. / This study aims to find out if the humanitarian intervention in Somalia, during the years 1993-1995 could be seen as humanitarian or not, according to the theory of solidarity, created by Nicholas J Wheeler. First it will be investigated if UNSOM II fits into the criterias of the theory of solidarity and thereafter it will be explained why. Results from the above investigation will give a better picture of the UNSOM II case and help to explain factors that might matter if a humanitarian intervention is judged humanitarian. The materials used in this essay are evaluations and reports from the mandate years published by the United Nations, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. This study found that UNSOM II was not a humanitarian intervention in relation to the theory of solidarity, considering the lack of proportional violence during the hunt for Aydid. Also, the result made by the operation was not enough to be valued as humanitarian. Some lessons learned from the operation might though be useful, in other regions in the world.

Just like rebel groups attract and recruit individuals, these organisations also experiencedisengagement. This study explores causes of rebel disengagement and examines why rebelgroups see increased levels of disengagement. Based on theoretical arguments derived fromliterature on rebel group structure and dynamics, and disengagement. The theoreticalframework is based on different types of rebels, and I suggest two causal mechanisms to fiteither economically opportunistic or ideologically driven rebels. I hypothesise that militarysetbacks for rebel groups lead to increased levels of disengagement. Military setbacks anddisengagement are measured on the group level while the causal mechanisms are considered onthe individual level. The case selection follows an exploratory most-similar design to scrutinisethe degree in which disengagement varies. Using a structured focused comparison, thehypothesis is tested on three cases, JAS during 2016 and 2021 in Nigeria and al-Shabaab during2023 in Somalia. The source material consists of news and NGO reports, academic sources, andsemi-structured expert interviews. The findings support a relationship between militarysetbacks and disengagement, but that further nuance is required to explain the degree to whichdisengagement occurs.

Since 2007, the UN-led operation African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), has been dedicated to marginalizing the terrorist organization al-Shabaab, assisting in the establishment of a functional government, and safeguarding the civilian population. The operation has been complex in many ways during the first five operational years between 2007 and 2011. However, AMISOM achieved a relative degree of stability in large parts of Somalia after 2011. This study analyzes the various factors that contributed to the heightened level of stability in Somalia. The purpose of this study is to broaden the understadning of AMISOM’s work in Somalia, the methods used in it, and the effects it had. The analysis is conducted through a theoretical framework from David Kilcullen’s theory of successful counter insurgency. The results of the study shows that the major turnaround is mainly based on AMISOM's large supply of soldiers. This allowed AMISOM to move from just defending itself to being able to start fighting insurgents. In addition, the study shows how AMISOM's achieved stability and why the power of the appointed government was primarily local in the vicinity of its capital, Mogadishu.

Thesis (MA (Political Science))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this thesis has been to analyse which similarities exist in combatants’ control over food supply lines to non-combatants in African civil conflict and evaluate whether these similarities are sufficient to permit generalisations about the use of food as a weapon in African civil conflict. The nature of this study is both descriptive and explanatory. The case studies of Darfur and Somalia form the descriptive part of this study. This thesis is also explanatory in that it aims to make a first attempt at theory building where such theory did not exist before. I try to explain if, how and why combatants intentionally use food as a means of power in civil conflict. Is the control over food a deliberate and rational choice by combatants or are situations of food scarcity and even hunger or famines simply a consequence of war? The case studies of Darfur and Somalia provide many similarities concerning the impact of conflict on livelihoods and food security. Famine is more an issue of limited access rather than availability. The use of food as a weapon displays a number of important similarities. Attacks on food security can be divided into acts of omission, commission and provision. In Darfur, combatants exercise a greater level of control over food supply lines than in Somalia. Finally, I argue that famine in African civil conflict is highly functional and has a distinct political-economic character. The creation of famine is often deliberate, with a hidden political agenda. In both Darfur and Somalia, attacks on food security serve a political, economic and military rationale. The political logic of attacks on food security was most important in Darfur, although here the signs of a sustainable war economy become apparent. In contrast, in Somalia, food production and procurement are attacked without the intent to destroy the livelihoods of specific societal groups, with the exception of the politically and economically marginalised groups in the south-central part of the country. The political logic is very superficial in Somalia. The level of deliberateness and organisation of attacks on food security, and hence the importance of the political logic, seem to tie in with the level of organisation of the central government, as well as with the presence or absence of a powerful ideology that clearly divides certain sections of the population from others. I recommend that further research be undertaken to analyse if theory on resources and conflict applies to attacks on food. Furthermore, additional research is needed on how to mitigate the negative effects of Food Aid. Finally, it is valuable to investigate to what extent effective government control and/or the presence of a binding ideology affect the importance of the political logic behind the attacks on food security. To this point, this research should be extended to include more case studies, with a specific focus on the factors of governmental control, ideology and political logic. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die doel van hierdie tesis was om die ooreenkomste oor die beheer wat gewapendes oor die voedselvoorsieningslyne vir ongewapendes in Afrika se siviele konflikte te ondersoek, en om te evalueer of hierdie ooreenkomste genoegsaam is om veralgemenings te maak oor die gebruik van voedsel as ‘n wapen in hierdie konflik. Die omvang van hierdie studie is beide beskrywend en verduidelikend. Die gevallestudies van Darfur en Somalia vorm die beskrywende deel van hierdie studie. Hierdie thesis is ook verduidelikend in die sin dat dit poog om ‘n eerste probeerslag te skep vir die bou van teorie waar dit voorheen nog nie bestaan het nie. Hierdie studie poog om te verduidelik as, hoe en wanneer gewapendes voedselvoorrade intentioneel gebruik as ‘n bron van mag in siviele konflikte. Is die beheer oor voedsel deurdagte en rationele keuse deur gewapendes, of is situasies van voedseltekorte of selfs hongersnood eenvoudig ‘n gevolg van oorlogvoering? Die gevallestudies van Darfur en Somalia bied vele ooreenkomste rakende die impak van konflik op oorlewingsmeganismes en voedselsekuriteit. Hongersnood is meer ‘n geval van beperkte toegang, eerder as beskikbaarheid. Gebruik van voedsel as wapen het ‘n aantal belangrike ooreenkomste opgelewer. Aanvalle op voedselsekuriteit kan opgedeel word in dade van weerhoud, kommissie en provisie. In Darfur het gewapendes ‘n groter vlak van beheer oor die lyne van voedselverskaffing as in Somalia. Uiteindelik is dit die argument van hierdie tesis dat hongersnood in siviele konflik in Afrika grootliks funksioneel is en duidelike polities/ekonomies van aard is. Hierdie oorsaak van hongersnood is telkemale opsetlik met ‘n gepaardgaande verskuilde politiese agenda. In beide Darfur en Somalia het aanvalle op voedselsekuriteit ‘n politiese, ekonomiese en militêre rationale. Die politieke aard van aanvalle op voedselsekuriteit was besonder opmerksaam in Darfur, alhoewel tekens van ‘n onderhoudbare oorlogsekonomie duidelik begin word het. In teenstelling is voedselproduksie en versekering in Somalia onder aanval sonder die bedoeling om die lewenswyse van sekere sosiale groepe te vernietig of van stryk te bring, met die uitsondering van die politiese en ekonomies gemarginaliseerde groepe in die suid-centrale deel van die land. Die politieke logika is baie oppervlakkig in die geval van Somalia. Die vlak van beplanning rakende aanvalle op voedselsekuriteit, en gepaardgaande die belang van die politieke redenasies, blyk samehorig te wees met die vlak van organisasie van die sentrale regering, asook die teenwoordigheid of afwesigheid van ‘n sterk ideologie wat sekere dele van die populasie duidelik onderskei van andere. Ek beveel aan dat verdere navorsing onderneem word om te analiseer of gepaste teorie op hulpmiddele en konflik relevant geag kan word in verband met voedselaanvalle. Verder word addisionele navorsing benodig ingevolge die beperking en kontrolering van die newe effekte van Food Aid. Uiteindelik is dit van pas en belangrik om die omvang van effektiewe regeringsbeheer en/of die teenwoordigheid van ‘n oorkoepelende en bindende ideologie aangaande die effek daarvan op die politieke beredenerings agter die aanvalle op voedselsekuriteit te bestudeer. In hierdie opsig behoort hierdie navorsing uitgebrei te word om meer gevallestudies in te sluit met ‘n spesifieke fokus op die individuele faktore van regeringsbeheer, ideologie en politieke redenasie.

[pt] A tese oferece uma leitura pós-colonial sobre as novas operações de paz da ONU a partir do caso da Somália. O argumento central é o de que tais operações são informadas por uma velha lógica, a da teoria da modernização, a qual, por sua vez, deita suas raízes nas teorias racistas e evolucionistas do século XIX. Nesse sentido, a tese sugere que essas novas operações são guiadas pela mesma lógica logocêntrica que informou o imperialismo europeu e a ação subseqüente do Conselho de Tutela das Nações Unidas. A tese visa a desestabilizar o ineditismo das novas operações de paz por meio da análise genealógica de um caso específico, o somali. Argumenta-se que a construção discursiva das sociedades alvo de tais operações como atrasadas, falidas ou pré-modernas cria as condições de possibilidade para as operações de paz conduzidas pelas Nações Unidas em nome da salvação, do progresso e da modernização das mesmas. Logo, a produção da descontinuidade/inovação das operações de paz em relação ao passado colonial depende da construção da continuidade das sociedades alvo de tais operações vistas como sujeitas a conflitos ancestrais e endógenos, ligados a um passado pré-colonial; revelando, desse modo, uma dependência mútua entre as identidades moderna e tradicional. A tese sugere que o reconhecimento do caráter híbrido das sociedades pós-coloniais, presente na perspectiva pós-colonial, nos permite desestabilizar o discurso logocêntrico subjacente às novas operações de paz da ONU. / [en] This dissertation offers a postcolonial reading about the new UN peace operations from the case of Somalia. The central argument is that these operations are informed by an old logic, namely: the modernization theory, which, in turn, lays its roots in evolutionary and racist theories of the nineteenth century. Thus, this dissertation suggests that these new operations are guided by the same logocentric logic that informed the European imperialism and the subsequent action of the United Nations Trusteeship Council. This research aims at destabilizing the novelty of the new peace operations through the genealogical analysis of a particular case: Somalia. It is argued that the discursive construction of the target societies of these operations as backward, failed or pre-modern creates the conditions of possibility for peace operations undertaken by the United Nations on behalf of salvation, progress and modernization of such societies. It is argued that the production of discontinuity and innovation of the new peace operations in relation to the colonial past depends on the construction of the continuity of the societies subject to these operations which are seen as under ancestral and endogenous conflicts tied to a pre-colonial past; revealing therefore the mutual dependency between the identities modern and traditional. Finally, the dissertation suggests that the recognition of the hybrid character of the postcolonial societies by the postcolonial perspectives allows us to destabilize the logocentric discourse underlying the new peace operations.

The dissertation uses the lens of electricity provision to examine processes of state formation in Somaliland, an unrecognized, self-declared independent state in the northwest of the former Somali Republic. The dissertation focuses on Hargeisa, the capital city at the heart of Somaliland's state-building project. After the collapse of the Somali state in 1991, private companies arose from the ruins of Hargeisa and turned the lights back on, navigating a fragmented post-war landscape by mobilizing local connections and transnational ties. However, being dependent on the political settlement that engendered the peace necessary for business, emerging private power providers were tied into a state-building project. The dissertation analyses the resulting tensions at the heart of this project, by examining the struggle to define the role, extents and limits of an emerging state in an interconnected world. Based on interviews in Somaliland and a survey of news media and grey literature, the dissertation has three aims. First, it provides a view into how social order and service provision persist after the collapse of the state. Secondly, it investigates how patterns of provision emerging in the absence of the state shape subsequent processes of state formation. Finally, it discusses how patterns of provision affect the interaction of state-building and market-making. In order to fulfil these aims, the dissertation examines how people invest in the project of building a state, both materially and discursively. The chapters present a narrative history of the electricity sector, explaining the attempts of both private companies and the government to claim sovereignty over the market and shape statehood in their own interests. The struggles shaping Somaliland's economic order reveal the contemporary significance of transnational connections, interconnected systems of capital flows, and the rise of corporate business actors. At the same time, they underline the abiding power of social structure, local identities, and historical memory.

The intention of this essay was to conduct two comparative analytical units called, “Most Similar System Design" (MSSD). The first unit is Somalia and the other is Iraq. The main purpose of the essay is to study deeper in Somalia and Iraq’s democratization process and also to analyse the deference’s between these two countries based on democratization-process. The essay's key questions are: How did Iraq get further into the democratization-process compared to Somalia? Why couldn't Somalia make a successful democratization process like Iraq? The essay is implemented by Dankwart A. Rustows democratization factors. The results indicated that: (i) Somalia failed in its democratization-process, due to the absence of national unity and a rapid transition. One of the main obstacles was Puntland and Somaliland which hindered the national unity of Somalia. (ii) On the other hand, Iraq was different in its democratization- process. With the support of the United States, Iraq achieved great success in the unification of Iraqi civil society the embodiment of smooth transition. (iii) Finally, the conclusion indicates that: national unity, societal norms and a rapid transition were the decisive variables.