No description available.

In 1994 Ethiopia introduced a federal system of government as a national level approach to intra-state conflict management. Homogenisation of cultures and languages by the earlier regimes led to the emergence of ethno-national movements and civil wars that culminated in the collapse of the unitary state in 1991. For this reason, the federal system that recognises ethnic groups¿ rights is the first step in transforming the structural causes of civil wars in Ethiopia. Against this background this research examines whether the federal arrangement has created an enabling environment in managing conflicts in the country. To understand this problematic, the thesis conceptualises and analyses federalism and conflict management using a qualitative research design based on in-depth interviewing and content-based thematic analysis ¿ taking the case study of the Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. The findings of the study demonstrate that different factors hinder the federal process. First, the constitutional focus on ethnic groups¿ rights has led, in practice, to lessened attention to citizenship and minority rights protection in the regional states. Second, the federal process encourages ethnic-based elite groups to compete in controlling regional and local state powers and resources. This has greatly contributed to the emergence of ethnic-based violent conflicts, hostile intergovernmental relationships and lack of law and order along the common borders of the regional states. Third, the centralised policy and decision making process of the ruling party has hindered genuine democratic participation of citizens and self-determination of the ethnic groups. This undermines the capacity of the regional states and makes the federal structure vulnerable to the dynamics of political change. The conflicts in Benishangul-Gumuz emanate from these causes, but lack of territorial land use rights of the indigenous people and lack of proportional political representation of the non-indigenous people are the principal manifestations. The research concludes by identifying the issues that determine the sustainability of the federal structure. Some of them include: making constitutional amendments which consider citizenship rights and minority rights protection; enhancing the democratic participation of citizens by developing the capacities of the regional states and correcting the organisational weakness of the multi-national political parties; encouraging co-operative intergovernmental relationships, and maintaining the territorial land use rights of the Benishangul-Gumuz indigenous people. / Addis Ababa University

In 1994 Ethiopia introduced a federal system of government as a national level approach to intra-state conflict management. Homogenisation of cultures and languages by the earlier regimes led to the emergence of ethno-national movements and civil wars that culminated in the collapse of the unitary state in 1991. For this reason, the federal system that recognises ethnic groups' rights is the first step in transforming the structural causes of civil wars in Ethiopia. Against this background this research examines whether the federal arrangement has created an enabling environment in managing conflicts in the country. To understand this problematic, the thesis conceptualises and analyses federalism and conflict management using a qualitative research design based on in-depth interviewing and content-based thematic analysis - taking the case study of the Benishangul-Gumuz regional state. The findings of the study demonstrate that different factors hinder the federal process. First, the constitutional focus on ethnic groups' rights has led, in practice, to lessened attention to citizenship and minority rights protection in the regional states. Second, the federal process encourages ethnic-based elite groups to compete in controlling regional and local state powers and resources. This has greatly contributed to the emergence of ethnic-based violent conflicts, hostile intergovernmental relationships and lack of law and order along the common borders of the regional states. Third, the centralised policy and decision making process of the ruling party has hindered genuine democratic participation of citizens and self-determination of the ethnic groups. This undermines the capacity of the regional states and makes the federal structure vulnerable to the dynamics of political change. The conflicts in Benishangul-Gumuz emanate from these causes, but lack of territorial land use rights of the indigenous people and lack of proportional political representation of the non-indigenous people are the principal manifestations. The research concludes by identifying the issues that determine the sustainability of the federal structure. Some of them include: making constitutional amendments which consider citizenship rights and minority rights protection; enhancing the democratic participation of citizens by developing the capacities of the regional states and correcting the organisational weakness of the multi-national political parties; encouraging co-operative intergovernmental relationships, and maintaining the territorial land use rights of the Benishangul-Gumuz indigenous people.

This dissertation focuses on the sub-national impact of foreign aid on civil conflicts by asking the question: How does foreign aid committed to contested areas affect the intensity of violence in those areas? The main theoretical contribution is to focus on how aid influences warring parties’ decisions to engage in contests over territorial control and how that in turn influences violence intensity. The study introduces two concepts: funding concentration and barriers to exploiting aid. A contested area has greater concentration of funding if warring parties expect a high value of aid to be distributed to only a few locations. Funding is instead diffused if the parties expect aid to be spread over many locations. A low barrier to exploiting aid is present if it is of a type that both state and non-state actors could potentially misuse. There is a high barrier if territorial control is required in order to exploit funding channels. The theory introduces three testable implications: First, greater funding concentration encourages conventional contests over territorial control, which increases military fatalities. The second proposal is that if there is a low barrier to exploiting aid (e.g. humanitarian and food aid) then there will be increased competition between warring parties and civilians, and hence more civilian fatalities. Third, high barrier funding (e.g. education aid) will motivate contests over territorial control and increase military fatalities. This dissertation uses geo-coded aid commitments data and introduces data of warring parties’ battleground control in sub-Saharan Africa, 1989–2008. The research design relies on propensity score matching where pairs of observations are matched based on a range of covariates. The results concerning barriers to exploitation are partially supported. High barrier aid increases military fatalities whereas low barrier aid has little impact on violence. Greater funding concentration increases military fatalities substantially compared to if there is low or no funding concentration. In line with theory, greater funding concentration does not increase civilian fatalities.

Syftet med undersökningen är att undersöka hur konflikter omskrivs i läromedel i samhällskunskap på gymnasieskolan. Via en kvalitativ läromedelsanalys av fyra läroböcker i samhällskunskap med inriktning mot gymnasieskolan undersöks hur konflikter definieras och vad som anses vara den föreliggande orsaken till konflikter utifrån en begreppsapparat taget ur fältet conflict resolution. De begrepp och förklaringar som undersöks är inkompatibilitet utifrån antingen territorium eller regeringsmakt samt mellanstatlig konflikt, statsbildningskonflikt och inbördeskrig. Resultatet visar att det existerar en skillnad gällande formuleringarna i de olika läroböckerna. Slutsatsen visar att både mellanstatlig konflikt och statsbildningskonflikt synonymiseras med konflikt medan inbördeskrig behandlas som ett eget begrepp. Vidare visar materialet med tydlighet på när en konflikt är grundad i inkompatibilitet gällande territorium. Konflikter grundade i inkompatibilitet gällande regeringsmakt saknar dock antingen en koppling eller en tydlig koppling till regeringsmakt. Slutsatsen som görs till följd av studien är att det undersökta materialet inte är konsekventa i sin beskrivning av konflikter. / The purpose of this study is to examine how conflicts are described in educational textbooks in social science for the upper secondary school. Via a qualitative textbook analysis of four educational textbooks in social science for the upper secondary school conflicts are examined by how they are defined and what is considered to be the cause for conflicts from a conceptual apparatus taken from the field of Conflict resolution. The concepts and explanations that are being examined are incompatibility of either territory or state and interstate armed conflict, state formation conflict, and intrastate conflict. The result shows a difference between the formulations in the textbooks. The conclusion shows how both interstate armed conflicts and state formation conflicts are being synonymized with conflict while intrastate armed conflicts are being treated as an own concept. Furthermore, the material shows with clarity when a conflict is sprung out of incompatibility of territory. Conflicts of state are however either missing a connection to incompatibility of state or the connection is unclear. The drawn conclusion following the study are that the material is not consistent in its description of conflicts.

Cette thèse examine les arguments et les modalités de justification des interventions armées des Etats, des coalitions étatiques et des organisations régionales dans les conflits internes d’autres Etats sous le prisme du droit international, lorsque ces interventions sont menées en dehors du cadre de l’ONU. Ce type d’intervention caractérise notre époque où les conflits intra-étatiques constituent l’écrasante majorité des conflits mondiaux et où l’ONU traverse une crise pluridimensionnelle. Les justifications, invoquées aussi bien par les Etats que par la doctrine, visent à légaliser ou du moins à légitimer ce qui serait, à première vue, considéré comme un recours à la force illégal au regard du droit des Nations Unies et en particulier au regard du principe de non intervention dans les guerres civiles. / This thesis examines the arguments and the modalities of justification of the military interventions of States, of the coalitions of the willing and of the regional organizations in the internal conflicts of other States by virtue of the international law, when these interventions take place outside the framework of the UNO. This type of intervention is current nowadays given that the intra-state conflicts constitute the overwhelming majority of world conflicts and taking into consideration the multidimensional crisis of the UNO. The justifications invoked by States as well as by the doctrine aim to legalize or at least to legitimize what would be considered at first sight as an illegal use of force under the law of the United Nations and in particular under the principle of non- intervention in civil wars.