Thesis (MPhil (Information Science))--Stellenbosch University, 2008. / Africa’s socio-economic reconstruction and development is constrained by the spate of violent
conflicts afflicting the continent. Internecine strife and humanitarian concerns have prompted
international debates surrounding the efficacy of existing conflict prevention, management and
resolution strategies. With Africa seemingly in a semi-permanent state of tension and crisis, and the
inability of the global and continental systems and structures to effectively deal with these
situations, it requires a disentanglement of a “complex interplay of institutional-bureaucratic and
political dynamics,” that place the continent at the centre of intervention dilemma. At the end of the Cold War, violent conflicts
on the continent did not wither away, but have become so complex, thus confounding efforts to
achieve sustainable peace. This complexity requires greater efforts to improve international,
regional and subregional institutional capacities and contingency instruments to facilitate effective responses. The key emphasis within the international community is to enhance instruments to
facilitate early detection of conflict situations in order to initiate preventive actions. Put differently,
conflict prevention can be facilitated through the dynamic improvement of the processes, structures
and functions of (conflict) early warning systems (EWS). In addition, political will is crucial
towards the operationalisation of such systems to ensure swift and coordinated implementation of
preventive actions. Cedric de Coning argues that conflict early warning systems can “improve our
ability to generate the political will necessary to authorize preventive action much earlier in the
conflict cycle, by improving our ability to estimate the potential future cost of inaction, and the way
we bring this information to the attention of decision makers.” Schmeidl also argues that “early
warning needs to be seen as a precondition to developing political will, and thus initiate (or better
inform) reasonable response strategies.” However, existing organisational structures crucial for
facilitating and expediting conflict prevention initiatives, suffer from “inertia” due to entrenched
political structures, hierarchies and competing interests. The United Nations (UN) is an international body with the authority to facilitate conflict prevention.
However, it is constrained by organisational complexities such as sectional political self-interest
and the “bureaucratic red tape in large bureaucracies”, thus hampering its ability to swiftly and with
the correct mandate, to respond to a call for preventive intervention. Hence the devolution of the
responsibilities for the settlement of conflicts to the regional and subregional bodies. Conflicts have
also “tended to pay little respect to State borders, proving the necessity for inter-State cooperation.”
Because of the regionalisation of conflicts, the case of inter-regional collaboration
has become increasingly vital as the “appropriate initial actors in seeking to defuse tensions and
resolve local disputes within the region.” To this end, stronger intergovernmental mechanisms to
facilitate early recognition of conflict situations and early intervention to prevent eruption or
mitigate escalation have to be maintained. African countries, as a result, bear the burden of peace interventions from the African Union (AU) which consists of 53 members, to regional economic
communities (RECs) such as Southern African Development Community (SADC), which consists
of 14 members. These organisations are attenuated by bureaucratic ineptitude for adaptive
behaviour that impact on swift and flexible responses. Nation states with diverse historical backgrounds, different political systems and unequal economic
strengths are inclined to have fundamental inequalities in power and influence. Consequently,
opposing political values, national interest and competing rationalities underlining their actions
become sources of contention and impede the establishment of a common ground. These hurdles
breed tensions and suspicion that impact on coordination of effort and information sharing
regarding conflict situations. Thus, to surmount these barriers, it is imperative to reconcile
competing interests through comprehensive inclusiveness, cooperation and effective collaborative
partnerships among various stakeholders, particularly civil society and political decision makers.
‘Preventive action’ must, insists the International Peace Academy (IPA), “not be considered as an
expedient product or event, but as a continuous, organic process that necessitates a highest degree
of inclusiveness and multisectoral participation in dialogue and peace-building. These aspects
should be institutionalised within the inter-regional organisations to establish the culture of common
effort for common purpose. In the interest of collective effort and to expand AU’s capacity for conflict prevention, the Peace
and Security Council (PSC) was established in 2003. The PSC is defined as “a collective security
and early warning arrangement to facilitate timely and efficient response to conflict and crisis
situation in Africa. Apparently, the PSC, as an instrument of conflict prevention on the
continent, is also aimed at achieving unity of thought in dealing with the threats to peace and
stability. In conflict situations, state sovereignty, political desirability and competing goals often
render peace processes ineffective due to differences regarding the best course of action. The PSC
is regarded as the means to create a platform for shared understanding and common vision
regarding the challenge of conflict prevention. Still, to be more effective, it requires a strong
collaboration with subregional organisations (e.g. SADC) and multisectoral participation of, for
example academics, research institutes, civil society organisations (CSOs), non-governmental
(NGOs) and community-based organisations (CBOs). The main thrust should be to create a shared framework for political decision makers to make “collective sense” of the problems on the
continent, and be in a position to synchronise efforts to achieve peace and stability. Conversely, the
AU and also SADC remain politically diverse organisations. As such, operationalisation of conflict
prevention initiatives is likely to encounter obstacles emanating from, as Gina van Schalkwyk
indicated, “conflict around political values amongst states in the [sub]region and …disputes on the
basis of divergent interpretations [of policies]. This creates a paradox between the necessity of
conflict prevention and the divergent national interests. Convergent thinking and creating a shared
outlook in the existing organisational frameworks (e.g. SADC) is imperative in order to generate
political will and to facilitate improved decision making and implementation of proactive responses
in the prevention of conflicts.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/2349 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Monama, Fankie Lucas |
| Contributors | Muller, Hans Peter, Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. Information Science. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Rights | Stellenbosch University |
Page generated in 0.0028 seconds