Leiden University
A new Global South
Perspective to
Peacebuilding
A comparison of the South African peacebuilding approach and the Western peacebuilding approach
Chiara M.C. Fakkel
2-7-2020
e-mail: c.m.c.fakkel@umail.leidenuniv.nl student number: 2612496
1
A new Global South Perspective to Peacebuilding: A comparison of the South African peacebuilding approach and the Western peacebuilding approach
Leiden University
International Relations: Global Conflict in a Modern Era Master Thesis
Chiara M.C. Fakkel 2612496
Supervisor: Dr. A.J. Gawthorpe 02-07-2020
2
Abstract
In the past couple of decades, the shared belief in peacebuilding has eroded. The failure from Western countries to deliver peace has led to a lot of criticism towards Western peacebuilding missions. The criticism was aimed at the fact that most Western peacebuilding approaches only focus on the implementation of liberal values. Whereas these values have proven to be successful in Western countries, the implementation of these values will not automatically create a peaceful situation in other countries. Therefore, more countries from the global South have expressed their interest in establishing a new and innovative peacebuilding approach which can be applied to non-Western countries. This thesis will therefore focus on the differences between peacebuilding approaches from the Global South and the Western peacebuilding approach. By looking at different International Relations (IR) theories related to peacebuilding and by analysing peacebuilding mission from the US, The Netherlands and South Africa, this thesis will contribute to exploring the differences between both approaches to peacebuilding and understanding what is the cause of these differences. The origin of these different peacebuilding approaches can be found in the different political and historical context of the countries, which has led to the establishment of Western ideology and a Pan-African ideology in their peacebuilding approaches.
3
Index
Abstract ... 2
Introduction ... 4
1. Literature review ... 7
1.1 The Global North ... 7
Western peacebuilding approaches ... 8
1.2 The rise of the Global South ... 10
Peacebuilding approaches from the Global South ... 11
1.3 Comparison: Global West & Global South ... 13
2. Methodology ... 15
2.1 Discourse analysis ... 15
The qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content ... 16
2.2 Research units... 17
2.3 Operationalization ... 19
3. The Western approach ... 20
3.1 The Dutch and American peacebuilding framework ... 20
3.2 The Qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content ... 21
Values ... 21
Descriptions ... 23
Prescriptions ... 24
4. The ‘South African’ approach ... 27
4.1 The PCRD framework ... 29
4.2 The Qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content ... 31
Values ... 32
Descriptions ... 32
Prescriptions ... 33
5. The South African approach vs. The Western approach ... 36
Conclusion ... 39
Bibliography ... 42
Appendix ... 48
Appendix 1: Analysed policy documents South African approach ... 48
Appendix 2: Analysed policy documents The Western approach ... 49
Appendix 3: Coding scheme for the Western approach ... 51
4
Introduction
Within the academic world, there are a lot of ongoing debates considering the concept of peacebuilding. In the past couple of years, the scientific opinion on how to make peace, and whether peacebuilding can be seen as an international responsibility have changed (Mamdami, 2010; Boege, 2011). There is doubt, particularly in countries from the Global South, about the Western approach in peacebuilding missions (Brisco, Drent, Homan, Lijn, Putten & Zandee, 2015). Many peacebuilding interventions, especially in the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, and in Africa, had been ineffective. The failure of Western peacebuilding missions to deliver long-lasting peace has led to a push from rising powers in the Global South against this Western dominance. This push from non-Western countries can be explained by recurring violent conflict in the Global South, and the predominantly Western solutions that these states adopt, such as “liberal state practices, democratic policies, free-market policies, and rights-based approaches to the rule of law” (Coning & Call, 2017). These solutions have been proven successful in the Western state-formation experience, but do not always deliver a long-lasting peace in the Global South (Coning & Call, 2017).
The democratic peace thesis and liberal peacebuilding are two important examples of Western dominance in peacebuilding (Brisco, Drent, Homan, et al., 2015; Coning & Call, 2017). This has led to criticism from non-Western countries towards the Western peacebuilding approach and to the rise of new actors in this field. New actors such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) have emerged as new agents that advance their own political and technical approaches to peacebuilding. Especially South Africa wants to position itself as a regional leader on the African continent and has established its own development cooperation. (Brisco, Drent, Lijn, et al., 2015).
Up to now, the academic world had mainly focused on Western approaches to peacebuilding and therefore neglected non-western approaches to peacebuilding. (Boege, 2011) . This is because most International Relations (IR) theories are “deeply rooted in the history, intellectual traditions and agency claims of the Western world” (Acharya, 2014, p. 3). By focussing on peacebuilding approaches from the global South, this thesis will offer a Global South perspective that looks beyond the traditional dichotomy of IR by focussing on how different ‘ideas of international order have been transposed into different regional contexts’ (Hurrell, 2016, p. 149).
5 This thesis will, therefore, focus on the differences between ‘Western’ and ‘Global South’ approaches to peacebuilding. Because what is exactly new and innovative about the peacebuilding approaches of rising powers from the Global South? And to what extent is the criticism faced towards Western peacebuilding approaches justified? Answering these questions will contribute to the ongoing debate about peacebuilding and peacekeeping missions in the Global South and what approaches or tactics should be applied in the future. This will be done by focussing on the changing geopolitical landscape and the rise of the Global South. But also by looking at different peacebuilding theories that influence Western peacebuilding approaches such as the liberal peacebuilding theory and the democratic peace thesis. The Reconstruction and Development Program (RDP) will be used to explore South African peacebuilding approach. Looking extensively at these theories will contribute to answering the following research question:
To what extent is South Africa’s approach to peacebuilding different from the Western approach, and what explains these differences?
This will be done by focusing on two different cases. To explore the Western approach to peacebuilding, this thesis will focus on both the American and the Dutch approach. This is because especially the American approach has faced a lot of criticism and is seen as a reflection of Western peacebuilding approaches. On the other hand, the Dutch approach is viewed as a more successful formula for making peace, because of their respect for the local community and knowledge of religion and culture (Zaalberg, 2013). Looking at two different reflections from the Western approach will contribute to establishing a more general Western framework to peacebuilding. When focussing on peacebuilding approaches from the Global South, the South-African approach will be examined. This is because South Africa is one of the 5 rising powers (BRICS). Up to now, these countries had little or no influence on how peacebuilding was understood, apart from participating in debates from the UN. Because of the changing geopolitical field, South Africa has become an important regional player with the ambition to expand their role as a regional player even more (Brisco, Drent, Lijn, et al., 2015).
Summarized, this thesis will argue that the differences in peacebuilding approaches can be explained by looking at the different historical and political context of the countries. This has led to the establishment of a Western ideology and a South African ideology which are reflected in their peacebuilding missions. By exploring the differences between Western peacebuilding
6 approaches and peacebuilding approaches from the global South, this thesis will offer a Global IR perspective that both focus on traditional Western IR theories but also on the Global South perspective towards peacebuilding approaches. Carrying out a discourse analysis from both Dutch, American and South African policy documents will help to explore the differences between Western peacebuilding approaches and the South African peacebuilding approach.
7
1. Literature review
The contemporary political field is characterized by changing international relations, whereas traditional IR theories are mainly influenced by Western norms and values, there seems to be growing attention towards IR theories from the global South, also known as Global IR. But still, most of the IR theories assume that the ‘West’ is dominating these political systems (Kayaoglu, 2010; Seth, 2011; Acharya, 2014; Hurrell, 2014)). This Western domination originated from the Westphalian peace, that made members of the European community capable of arranging their expansion among themselves (Kayaoglu, 2010; Seth, 2011).
Because of the rise of the Global South, the geopolitical field has changed and thus many critics became aware of the Western dominance in peacebuilding. This has led to a growing demand for peacebuilding approaches that are less focussed around Western norms and values (Mahdavi, 2015). Therefore, this chapter will focus on theories about Western peacebuilding approaches, and peacebuilding approaches from the Global South, especially the South African peacebuilding approach. But before discussing different peacebuilding approaches, it is important to understand what peacebuilding is. The United Nations (UN) describes peacebuilding as:
“Activities undertaken on the far side of conflict to reassemble the foundations of peace and provide the tools for building on those foundations something that is more than just the absence of war. Thus, peacebuilding includes but it not limited to reintegrating former combatants into civilian society, strengthening the rule of law, improving respect for human rights through the monitoring, education and investigation of past and existing abuses and promoting conflict resolution and reconciliation techniques” (United Nations, 2000, p.3) Besides different peacebuilding approaches, this chapter will also focus on the changing geopolitical field. This will be done by focussing on the political and historical context of the Western world.
1.1 The Global North
Some of the most leading IR theories linger on the assumption that the West sets the standard in the political area. Therefore, “Western liberal democracies are constantly being treated as the only entities capable of bringing order to political systems” (Kayaoglu, 2010, 213). This can be explained by referring to two historical examples. The first one is the Westphalian peace, which made members of the European community capable expanding their power, the Westphalian peace
8 can also be seen as the beginning of the modern international politics, wherein Western states were seen as hegemonic powers (Kayaoglu, 2010; Seth, 2010). Secondly, the Industrial Revolution has played an important role in economic and technological superiority in European states. As a result, Europeans used their superiority to Europeanize the rest of the world, this meant that the Europeans were able to spread their norms and values across the world, but also to expand their territory (Borneman, Fowler, 1997; Seth, 2011). This great European dominance is often connected with colonial dominance, which still has a major impact on today’s political field and international intervention (Quijano, 2000). Many scholars refer to the current impact of the colonial era as the ‘colonial present’. This is because the colonial past still influences the current geopolitical field. Some scholars argue that countries still feel connected with their former colonies and therefore are more likely to intervene during a conflict. In other words, the colonial past still shapes current peacebuilding missions and can, therefore, be described as the “colonial present” (Dirlik, 2002; Ferguson, 2004; Legg, 2007). These colonial forces are visible on different scales, such as “transnational flows of capital, global imaginary geographies, stereotypes, cultural norms and values and language” (Legg, 2007, p. 1).
To put it more precisely, the “colonial present” also influences international intervention and peacebuilding initiatives. Chandler (2013) explains this by using the concept of Western Responsibility. Western Responsibility refers to “traditional paternalist understandings, formalising inequality and denial of rights”(Chandler, 2013, p. 184). Because of their colonial rule, Western countries still feel responsibility concerning their former colonies, therefore they try to end inequalities because of their colonial rule. To put it briefly, the West has dominated the geopolitical field for a long time. As a result, peacebuilding initiatives are also influenced with Western Responsibility, therefore the following paragraph will elaborate on the Western peacebuilding approaches.
Western peacebuilding approaches
Because of the Western dominance in the geopolitical field, most peacebuilding initiatives are influenced by Western norms and values. One of the most important norms and values is the appreciation of democracy (Owen, 1994). The goal of most western peacebuilding initiatives is the implementation of Western-oriented democracy and other liberal norms and values. This paragraph will, therefore, focus on liberalism in IR and how this is reflected in peacebuilding missions.
9 The democratic peace theory is one of the most powerful theories within the debate on the causes of war and peace and is one of the closest things things we have to an empirical law in IR (Owen, 1994; Rosato, 2003). In his article How Liberalism Produces Democratic Peace, Owen (1994) argues that liberal ideas lead to liberal democracies and those liberal democracies will not attack each other because they share the same set of norms and values. On the other hand liberal democracies can attack illiberal states, because they can potentially be dangerous. But sceptics argue that these conditions are subjective because when leaders want to start a war, they just argue that the other state is an illiberal state. In the end, liberal states trust states that share the same liberal values and therefore do not want to attack them. Over time, the form of a liberal democracy has differed, but the implementation of democracy has always been one of the main components of the democratic peace theory (Owen, 1994).
Liberal peacebuilding can be seen as the practical implementation of the democratic peace thesis. Supporters of the liberal peacebuilding strategy argue that implementing democracy in a conflict area, is the best way to create a peaceful environment (Zakaria, 1997). In his article ‘Saving Liberal Peace’, Roland Paris argues that liberal governments are best capable of functioning during a (political) conflict, because liberal democracies promote the rule of law, security reform and a functioning market economy (Paris, 2010; Sabaratnam, 2013). The practices of liberal peacebuilding are grounded in the liberal peace thesis of Locke, Smith, Kant and Mill, and is thus rooted in liberalism (Selby, 2013). Liberalist ideas have been rooted in international conceptualizations and practices of peacebuilding in five different ways (Madhav, Lee & Ginty, 2014, p. 368-372):
1. The promotion of democracy; which is a result of the liberal notion of the ‘rational empowered individual’.
2. The rule of law; which is a result of the liberal canon that believes in a transparent regulation of society.
3. Emphasis on human rights; has been an international norm since the first Geneva Convention
4. Security sector reforms; fits into all the other pillars of liberal peace
5. Governance reforms; ‘peace-as-governance’ is a widely-promoted form of peace in western peacebuilding approaches.
10 These general liberal ideas are being reflected in current peacebuilding missions, which has led to the realisation of a liberal framework. But critics argue that the liberal peace framework creates a ‘highly standardized’ model on how to create a long-lasting peace. The fact that the framework provides such a standardized framework, it is incapable of coping with the changing geopolitical field, like the rise of the global South (Selby, 2013). Besides, Richmond (2009) argues that the liberal peacebuilding framework fails to engage with the local community and neglects the local cultural practices. Therefore, liberal peacebuilding has become a subject of intense debate (Selby, 2013). Because of the ‘highly standardized’ model, that neglects local context and disempowers local communities it has delivered poor-quality outcomes that were characterised by weak democratisation, corruption and socio-economic inequalities (Owen, 1994; Ginty & Richmond, 2009; Selby, 2013). Sabaratnam (2013) states that the liberal peacebuilding framework “can be understood as a set of particular ideas and practices intended to reform and regulate polities in the global South”. Selby (2013, p. 259-260) also describes liberal peacebuilding as a colonial project that has the aim to restructure the global South. But Paris rejects this statement that compares liberal peacebuilding with European colonialism. First colonialism was practised to benefit from the imperial states both materially and strategically, but now modern UN missions are not motivated by materially of strategically benefit (Paris, 2010). Moreover, Paris also rejects the statement that argues that liberal peacebuilding has delivered poor-quality outcomes and therefore has done more harm than good (Owen, 1994; Ginty & Richmond, 2009; Selby, 2013). Paris argues that “recognizing the shortcomings does not equal the fact that peacebuilding has been harmful to the societies. In most cases, the countries were probably better off than they would be without the peacebuilding missions” (Paris, 2010). Besides these critical statements, liberal peacebuilding does still portray a Western-based approach to peacebuilding missions, which is reflected in the appreciation of democracy, governance control and other liberal values. Shortly, many peacebuilding initiatives are based on liberalism, and therefore can be seen as Western peacebuilding approaches. But especially the democratic peace thesis and liberal peacebuilding can be seen as Western frameworks for peacebuilding.
1.2 The rise of the Global South
Because of colonialism and eurocentrism, Europe has dominated the geopolitical field for over a long time. Wallerstein has divided the world in “developed and underdeveloped” and in “the periphery and the core regions”, where the global South was labelled as underdeveloped and as a
11 peripheral region. This division was based on both economy and politics (Wallerstein, 1987). But since 1989, the clear division between the West and the Global South has faded away. The collapse of the Soviet Union has changed the relationship between the First and Third world completely (Rehbein, 2018).
The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) have become important players in the contemporary geopolitical field, and are expected to grow even more in the coming decades (Keukeleire, & Hooijmaaijers, 2014; Brisco, Drent, Homan, et al., 2015). This is because they all have great economic, military and political power resources which they can use to “contribute to the production of international order”. Besides these countries believe that they are entitled to a bigger and more influential role in world affairs (Keukeleire, & Hooijmaaijers, 2014, p. 584). This is reflected in their criticism towards the Western peacebuilding approach. Especially South-Africa wants to establish itself as a regional leader, because it wants to decrease the imperialistic relationship with France.
Peacebuilding approaches from the Global South
Two decades ago, peacebuilding was understood as a coordinated package with resolving conflicts as its main goal. Since the rise of new partners from the Global South, this ‘coordinated package’ has changed. These new partners from the Global South tend to criticize Western peacebuilding approaches because this approach usually does not work for countries within the Global South. This has led to new peacebuilding approaches from the Global South (Call & Coning, 2017). These new peacebuilding approaches are mostly led by rising powers, such as South Africa, Brazil, India and Turkey (Call & Coning, 2017). Besides offering an alternative peacebuilding approach to traditional Western peacebuilding approaches, these new agents from the Global South also use peacebuilding to ‘strengthen their position in regional affairs and global institutions’ (Call & Coning, 2017, p. 243).
The book Rising Powers & Peacebuilding from Charles T. Call & Cederic de Coning (2017), provides a great overview about peacebuilding approaches from Rising powers from the Global South. By describing peacebuilding approaches from Brazil, Indonesia, India, Turkey and South Africa, they create a bigger understanding of general peacebuilding approaches from new actors. They argue that these ‘new rising powers’ tend to emphasize the local community more than Western peacebuilding approaches. Mawdsley (2012, p. 63) concludes that many countries from
12 the Global South have “established development cooperation agencies, that prioritize South-South technical assistance, new less conditional modes of operating, appropriate peer-provided guidance on political processes, and a celebration of national ownership and empowerment”. These Southern approaches are an alternative for Western-dominated approaches, also known as liberal approaches. Call & Coning (2017, p. 17) argue that whereas liberal peacebuilding approaches are Western-dominated, peacebuilding approaches from the global South emphasize “the local contextual dynamics and opportunities”. But whereas
Call & Coning (2017) provide a description from peacebuilding approaches from the Global South, this thesis will also compare peacebuilding approaches from the Global South with the Western peacebuilding approach. Besides, these differences and similarities will be critically analysed in order to contribute to the bigger debate considering the criticism towards the Western peacebuilding approach and the ‘new’ peacebuilding approaches from the Global South.
When looking at peacebuilding initiatives from South-Africa, it is striking the aid that South-Africa offers to the African region, is different from Western peacebuilding initiatives. South Africa’s approach to peacebuilding is characterized by its anti-imperialistic
view on international affairs, which can be explained by their colonial past. During South Africa’s colonial suppression, Western states controlled the African population via a system of ‘imperial rule’ (Fraser, 2007). As the map shows, European suppressors divided the African countries with new territorial boundaries, these new colonies were the result of competition between different European states and had nothing to do with ethnic identities, which led to the dislocation of many ethnic groups.
Besides, South Africa is critical towards Western powers that take advantage of difficulties in African countries to create regime changes and impose puppet governments. Peacebuilding initiatives from South Africa are justified by a feeling of moral obligation to support Africa (Call Figure 1 Africa in 1914 (Colins & Burns, 2013)
13 & Coning, 2017). Therefore, South Africa’s interventions are “driven by interests that she exemplifies as geographical, security, humanitarian, and furtherance of personal and political party relationships by wielders of power and drivers of state policy at a particular time” (Call & Coning, 2017, p. 112). Since there are many prejudices towards peacebuilding approaches from the Global South, it is important to critically look at peacebuilding missions from the Global South and especially from South Africa (Zaalberg, 2013; Lucey & Gida, 2014; Call & Coning, 2017). When looking at different peacebuilding mission from South Africa, it seems that there is one framework that occurs frequently in academic papers. The PCRD framework is a framework that can be used to get a better understanding of the South African peacebuilding approach. The PCRD does not only focus on ending violence, but it does also focus on social welfare, human rights and political governance (Lucey & Gida, 2014). Besides, South African peacebuilding missions are led by a moral obligation to help others and by the need to think about the local community and community participation. This can be achieved by using a cooperative framework between the state and the local community (Call & Coning, 2017).
In short, not a lot has been written about the role of rising powers in the peacebuilding field. But in their book Rising powers & Peacebuilding, Call & Coning (2017) argue the importance of these rising power in the changing geopolitical field. These rising powers emphasize the local community and South-Africa, for example, has a need-driven peacebuilding initiatives which can be seen as a reaction towards the Western approach that sees peacebuilding as a coordinated package.
1.3 Comparison: Global West & Global South
Imperialism, eurocentrism and colonialism have shaped the contemporary geopolitical field. The Westphalian peace and the Industrial Revolution have led to European superiority. This European superiority expanded further with the rise of the colonial era. The colonial dominance still influences the current international relations. Former colonial rulers still feel connected and therefore responsible for their former colonies. Chandler describes this phenomenon as ‘Western Responsibility’, but this is only one example of the way that the West influences peacebuilding approaches. The democratic peace thesis and liberal peacebuilding are probably the most known Western peacebuilding approaches. Something they all have in common is their focus on democracy and sovereignty, these two aspects are mostly seen as Western values. But since the past couple of decades, there has been a push from countries from the global South. These countries argue that whereas these Western values have been proven to be successful in the West, they do
14 not create a long-lasting peace in the Global South. Especially South Africa wants to be a regional leader and therefore plays a leading role in peacebuilding initiatives in the African region. These peacebuilding approaches operate within a cooperative framework between the state and the local community. Besides, these peacebuilding approaches from South Africa are justified by a moral obligation to support the African region and they are need driven. To put it briefly, because of the changing geopolitical field, there seems to be a growing demand for peacebuilding initiatives from the Global South. Whereas the West mostly focused on liberal values such as democracy and sovereignty, the Global South emphasizes the local community and need-driven interventions. But whereas different scholars, such as Call & Coning (2017) argued that there are different peacebuilding approaches, other academics such as Zaalberg (2013) state that these different peacebuilding approaches only exist as a kind of exaggeration. This means that the non-aggressive Dutch approach only exists in contrast to the violent and hard-handed American approach, or that peacebuilding approaches from the Global South only exists in contrast to Western peacebuilding approaches who fail to deliver a long-lasting peace in the Global South by only focusing on the implementation of Western values (Zaalberg, 2013). These contradictions raise the question of whether the South African approach really can be seen as a ‘better’ alternative to Western peacebuilding approaches. The literature describes South African peacebuilding approaches as need-driven and led by a moral obligation, but to what extent is this true? Therefore, this research will elaborately look at how these peacebuilding approaches are portrayed within the academic world, and how these approaches are reflected in real-world peacebuilding missions.
15
2. Methodology
To understand the difference between the Dutch and South African peacebuilding approach, a discourse analysis will be carried out which will consist of a qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content. This type of analysis aims to “describe and analyse the specific ideas and the specific ideological contents” (Boreus & Bergström, 2017, p. 88), Using this type of discourse analysis will contribute to establishing different ideologies within military doctrine and policy documents and can be used to explain possible differences within peacebuilding approaches. In other words, by critically analysing policy documents, it will become clearer, how and why different peacebuilding approaches exist.
2.1 Discourse analysis
There has been an ongoing debate about peacebuilding and the so-called different approaches to peacebuilding and whether the Western dominance in the field can be seen as either good or bad. To get a better understanding about these different peacebuilding approaches, a discourse analysis will be carried out. A discourse analysis is a frequent used method within humanities and social sciences (Boréus & Bergström, 2017).
The goal of qualitative analysis is: “interpreting, describing and analysing specific ideas and ideological content that are inseparably linked to the established way of thinking” (Boréus & Bergström, 2017, p. 86). How people and institutions think about a certain subject is reflected through propagated messages, opinion-forming institutions, public debates, the use of language in the media, and which institution maintains the ‘correct’ worldview (Boréus & Bergström, 2017). Interpreting these specific ideas and ideological content will provide more insight into these different approaches between the West and the Global South.
Within the academic world, many definitions of the word ‘discourse’ exists. Rose (2012) describes the discourse analysis as: “A researching phenomenon that is outside the information, but that can be researched through the information”. Boréus & Bergström (2017) describe discourse as a way to understand spoken and written words, social practices and social phenomena. A discourse analysis is based on the fact that language itself does not provide a meaning. Howarth (2000) agrees with Boréus & Bergström and connects discourse to social acts and other social phenomena. Discourse also focusses on the ‘power issue’, for example, which actor or agent has the right to express their opinion on a particular issue (Carrabine, 2011). In short, the main goal of discourse
16 analysis is to study power related issues that exist ‘behind the language’ (Boréus & Bergström, 2017).
The qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content
To establish certain kind of ideas and ideologies within policy documents, mission reports and military doctrine, a qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content analysis will be carried out. Boréus & Bergstrom (2017), critically describe the main purpose of this type of analysis and how to apply out this analysis.
Most ideas do not appear on their own, they exist within a system of ideas, also known as ideologies. These ideas are established by “opinion-holding or opinion-forming agents and networks, such as media companies, newspapers think tanks, lobby groups, social movements or political parties” and can be found within “values, beliefs, attitudes, and norms in political culture, public opinion and electoral behaviour” (Boréus & Bergström, 2017, p. 88, 86). But also within official government documents and public policy reports which will be used during both of the discourse analysis (Boréus & Bergström, 2017). Boréus & Bersgtröm describe five types of investigation and analysis in the study of ideas: idea analysis, idea criticism, normative suggestion, historical and empirical studies and ideology critique. To look at the differences between the Western- and South African peacebuilding approach, it will be important to critically look at concepts such as ‘power’ and ideologies. Therefore, the fifth type, ideology critique will form the basis of the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content (Boréus & Bergström, 2017). The main goal of ideology critique is to “reveal the hidden social function, or the real causes, behind the expressed ideas and seemingly natural common sense”. In other words, the aim of ideology critique is to explore the hidden interests that exist behind an established pattern of thoughts, and to look at the (in-) direct consequences of these patterns in society (Boréus & Bergstrom, 2017, p. 95).
In order to reveal the hidden ideas or ideology, it is important to look at three dimensions of thoughts or ideas: values, descriptions and prescriptions, also known as the “triadic combination: the V-D-P-triad (Boréus & Bergstrom, 2017, p. 98)”. The VDP-triad is a formal model of the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content and will be used to search for ideological content. Value-statements can be expressed in ideals, goals preferences and interests. The descriptive point of the triad is more focused on ‘a concrete descriptive account of the situation,
17 issues, problems or possibilities of the situation’. The third point of the triad, prescriptions looks at “general principles of social and political action as suggested in the traditions of social and political philosophy, theory and ideology”, this can be reflected in policy recommendations, norms or rules (Boréus & Bergstrom 2017, p. 92-98). When carrying out a qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content, it is possible to only find one or two of the three factors of the VDP-triad, because the other factors are not ‘verbally present’. In such cases,e it is important to continue looking for these factors within other texts of the author. In order to “discern which kinds of ideas are present and which are not”, Boréus and Bergstrom, created an analytical scheme of ideological content:
Table 1. VDP-triad
Values Descriptions Prescriptions
Fundamental level
More, social, cultural or political values
Concrete descriptive or evaluative accounts of the situation or the objects of the situation
General principles of social and political action (as suggested in the traditions of social and political
philosophy, theory and ideology).
In other words, the VDP-triad “suggests to search for the explicit or implicit presence of all three factors in a text “. . .” in order to be able to beare the actual and effective action-guiding thought content” (Boréus & Bergstrom, 2017 p. 103). In short, the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content is used to establish a set of ideas and/or ideologies within and a text. This set of ideas or/ideologies can exist explicit and/or implicit in a text. This information can be used to explore the differences between South African and Western peacebuilding approaches
2.2 Research units
To understand why these differences between Western peacebuilding approaches and the South African peacebuilding approach exists, this thesis will focus on three different cases. In order to explore the Western peacebuilding approaches, peacebuilding missions from the Netherlands and America will be analysed. These countries have been chosen because of the attention that has been given towards both approaches. The Dutch approach, for example, has been praised by President Obama as a “new comprehensive, population-centric and more subtle approach to peacebuilding” (Zaalberg, 2013, p.). Besides, the Dutch approach has also received the attention of several newspapers, such as the BBC who describe the Dutch peacebuilding mission in Afghanistan as a success (Grammaticas, 2009). What makes the Dutch approach an interesting case study is related
18 to the fact that it has been labelled as a success, whereas most Western peacebuilding initiatives have been seen as ineffective. On the other hand, looking at American peacebuilding missions will be interesting because this approach has faced a lot of critique. This critique is related to the fact that their approach is considered to be more hard-handed. Besides, the American peacebuilding approach is considered to be an influential peacebuilding force across the world. It is considered as one of the most important ones next to NATO and the UN (Berdal, 1994; Joffe, 1997). So looking at two much-discussed peacebuilding forces will contribute to creating an interesting overview of the Western approach. In order to explore peacebuilding approaches from the Global South, peacebuilding missions from South Africa will be analysed. Because of South Africa’s need to establish itself as a global player and as a “champion for African interests in the continent and globally”, South Africa has expressed its interests in peacebuilding (Call & Coning, 2012, p. 107). With their dual membership in the UN Security Council and by their membership in the G20, South Africa has already positioned itself as a growing player in international- and African peace and security matters. So because of South Africa’s growing interests, and because of their growing role within the African peacebuilding field, it will be interesting to explore the South African peacebuilding approach. This approach can be used as an example for looking at the general peacebuilding approach from the Global South.
Before critically analysing policy documents and military doctrines, it is important to remember that policy documents are mostly written for citizens or governments. There are different types of policy documents, these differences are related for who the medium is intended for. By using discourse analysis it is important to be aware of these differences. It is therefore important to be transparent about how the policy documents are selected and which search criteria have been applied. During the analysis different types of policy documents will be selected: Military doctrines and foreign policy documents will be used to get a more general overview concerning the foreign policy of the Dutch, American and South African government; and mission-specific documents will be used to critically look at how these missions are being shaped.
When selecting policy-documents for both cases I will select documents between 1999 and 2019 and documents concerning specific missions, military doctrines, peacebuilding and peacebuilding will be selected. For selecting policy-documents for the ‘Western approach to peacebuilding’, the
19 website of the Dutch Department of Defence, the Dutch Ministry of Foreign affairs will1, the
American Defence department and the American Department of Foreign affairs2 will be used. For selecting policy-documents for the ‘South African approach’, the website of the South African Government will be used3.
2.3 Operationalization
By reading literature concerning peacebuilding theories and the changing geopolitical field a number of concepts will be established. These concepts will be applied to the selected research units by means of deductive coding, this means that the IR theories that are discussed during the literature review will be used to create several codes. During the analysis, two different coding schemes will be used which can be found in the appendix. The book from Boréus & Bergström (2017) has been used as a guideline to create a coding scheme. In order to analyse policy documents from the Netherlands and America, a coding scheme related to Western IR theories will be used. To analyse policy documents from South Africa, a coding schema related to Global South IR theories will be used. These coding schemes will be applied to the policy documents, by linking different texts fragments to different codes, it will be possible to create a better understanding of the ideas that exist behind different peacebuilding theories.
1www.defensie.nl; https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/ministeries/ministerie-van-defensie
https://www.government.nl/ministries/ministry-of-foreign-affairs
2https://dod.defense.gov/
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/topics/us-foreign-policy
20
3. The Western approach
The Western world has dominated the geopolitical field for over a long time. This has led to the fact that many peacebuilding missions are based on Western norms and values. The purpose of this chapter will be to understand the ideas behind Western peacebuilding approaches, in order to compare differences between the South African approach and the Western approach. This will be done by using the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideologies to establish a certain set of ideas or ideologies, and explore how this set of ideas fits into the Western peacebuilding approach. This will be done by analysing policy documents written by the American government and the Dutch government.
The discourse-analysis has shown that Western peacebuilding missions originate from a certain feeling of responsibility, also known as Western responsibility: Western countries are more likely to intervene in a country or former colony to end inequalities and conflicts as a result of their colonial rule (Chandler, 2013). The American government for example, emphasizes the fact that they are the “primary force to maintain international security and stability”, the fact that the Americans see themselves as a ‘primary force’ to bring peace, relates to the paternalist understandings that they still feel as a result from their colonial domination (Department of Defence, 2018, p. 5).
In general, Western approaches to peacebuilding emphasize Western norms and values (Zakaria, 1997; Paris, 2010; Chandler, 2013; Sabaratnam, 2013 and Mabera & Spies, 2016). ). But how exactly are these values reflected in policy documents? The qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content can be used to look at the values, descriptions and prescriptions that are shown within the policy documents. The ideas and/or ideologies that are established during the qualitative analysis of ideas and content will be applied to American and Dutch peacebuilding missions. 3.1 The Dutch and American peacebuilding framework
The Western peacebuilding approach mostly refers to liberal values and strategies such as the liberal peacebuilding strategy. The qualitative analysis of ideas and ideologies will help to establish the Western ideology that exists within Western peacebuilding approaches. Looking at peacebuilding missions will contribute to understanding how this ideology is based on Western political and historical context, and it will help to explore how this ideology exists within western
21 peacebuilding missions. This will be done by critically analysing American and Dutch policy documents by using the VDP-triad.
3.2 The Qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content Values
When looking at the values that are being portrayed in the policy documents, it seems that liberal values are being emphasized. Paris (2010), Selby (2013), and Madhav, Lee & Ginty (2014), have stated that liberal values such as adherence to the rule of law, human rights, security reforms and governance reforms are often reflected in Western peacebuilding missions. These values are also reflected in the policy documents of the Netherlands and the US. By emphasizing the need for “a stable democratic country”, the Netherlands refers to the appreciation of democracy (Rijksoverheid, 2014, p. 5). And by repeatedly referring to defending ‘democratic values and human rights’, ‘the rule of law’, the ‘reform of local security institutions’ the US acknowledges that their foreign policy and their peacebuilding missions are embedded in liberal values (Department of Defence, 2018, p. 22; Fox, Hicks, Keane, et al., 2018, p.4; Department of the Army, 2014, p. 122).
The appreciation of liberal values can be traced back to the End of the Cold War. In his article Saving Liberal Peace, Roland Paris (2010) describes the development of liberal values into peacebuilding missions from the Western world. The end of the Cold War labelled the start of a growing number of UN peacebuilding missions. The UN showed a growing interest in ‘helping countries emerging from civil wars’ (Paris, 2010, p.337). Many countries and organisations such as the UN, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Organisation of American States (OAS) shared the conviction that ‘political and economic liberalism offered a key to solving a broad range of social, political and economic problems’ (Paris, 2010, p. 340). This has led to a rising number of countries that held elections, and a broad ideological shift in turn. This ideological shift resulted in the fact that many international organisations opened up their attitude towards more liberal forms of government. During this phase, the UN launched its first peacebuilding missions that focused on the promotion of peace by “encouraging political and economic liberalisation of the host states” (Paris, 2010, p. 341). The promotion of liberal democratic systems, is the beginning of the liberal peacebuilding strategy. As Madhav, Lee & Ginty (2014) stated, most peacebuilding missions were led by both major international organizations or by Western countries, this has led to the fact that missions influenced by the
22 ‘Western notions of liberalism’ (Madhav, Lee & Ginty, 2014). Or to put it differently, the new wave of peacebuilding missions after the Cold War, can be seen as a “larger hegemonic project whose ideological purpose is to spread the values and norms of dominant power brokers” (Paris, 2010, p. 334).
Both Dutch and American peacebuilding missions show a reflection of these liberal values. When looking at the Dutch peacebuilding approach it seems that the foundations of the Dutch approach can be found in the Dutch colonial warfare and in Dutch political, military and strategic culture and even national culture in general (Zaalberg, 2013). When Zaalberg (2013) talks about the Dutch approach, he emphasizes the non-violent elements of this approach, which the Dutch’s label as their ‘own unique approach’. But this non-violent approach is not reflected in the Dutch policy documents when the Dutch government describes their participation in the peacebuilding mission in Afghanistan, they mostly emphasize their support in the ‘civil-military cooperation’ (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2018a). So, besides emphasizing the civic-military relation, the Dutch government does not refer to their non-violent approach to peacebuilding, instead they emphasize the liberal values that were established during the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideologies:
“States have an interest in upholding the principle of sovereignty and promoting the prosperity of the population “ . . .” This leads to choices and activities that, also fuelled by idealistic goals, serve the national interest. Promoting the international legal order and combating violations of human rights are examples of such idealistic objectives” (Defensie staf, 2019, p. 20)
By referring to the principle of sovereignty and human rights, this quote from the Dutch Defence Doctrine shows a reflection of liberal values in their peacebuilding missions. The Dutch Defence Doctrine explains the military instrument of power and its usefulness and describes the fundamental principles in which the military power instrument is used (Bauer, 2019). The Dutch Defence doctrine can, therefore, be seen and used as a Dutch peacebuilding framework.
The American peacebuilding approach also refers to the Western ideology, which is based on liberal values. By referring to the promotion of effective democracy, the following quote shows the importance of liberal values in America’s National Defence Strategy.
23 “The President’s 2006 National Security Strategy (NSS) describes an approach founded on two pillars: promoting freedom, justice, and human dignity by working to end tyranny, promote effective democracies, and extend prosperity; and confronting the challenges of our time by leading a growing community of democracies” (Department of Defence, 2008, p.6).
So, by referring to liberal values such as sovereignty, human rights and the promotion of democracy, the Western ideology is reflected in the Dutch and American approach to peacebuilding. In other words, the Netherlands and the US feel that the implementation of liberal values in peacebuilding mission is an essential tool to create a long-lasting peace. This means that liberalism is embedded in Western peacebuilding missions.
Descriptions
This Western ideology is also reflected in the descriptive point of the VDP-triad. These values are reflected in the way that the American and the Dutch government talk about their common enemy, which is terrorists. The Dutch government has expressed their concern about terrorism in their policy documents: “If ISIS is only combated in Iraq, it is likely that the terrorists will move to Syria and other countries in the region with all the associated problems” (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2018b p. 5). Besides, the American government has also expressed its hostile stance towards terrorist in their National Strategy for Counterterrorism, they feel that terrorists are seeking to undermine American ideals, by using violence and propaganda to advance their depraved goals (United States Department of State Publication, 2019, p.1). The American government therefore feels the need to confront terrorist, with the combined power of America’s strength. This means that the US will “prioritize integrated actions and resources against those terrorists that have both the intent and capability to attack the United States and our interests abroad” (United States Department of State Publication, 2019, p.11).
The hostility from both the Netherlands and America, but also from Western countries, in general, can be explained by looking at the democratic peace theory. Because most Western countries share the same liberal values, they prefer to deal with liberal and democratic regimes when they can, and they aim to create such liberal and democratic regimes when they have the opportunity during peacebuilding missions. The democratic peace theory argues that liberal democracies do not attack each other because they share the same set of norms and values. On the other hand, liberal
24 democracies can attack illiberal states because they can potentially be dangerous (Owen, 1994). This means that in this case, terrorist groups are seen as illiberal democracies, and are therefore seen as a threat towards liberal democracies. In other words, liberal values are reflected in the way the American and Dutch government describes their enemy. Because they argue that terrorism leads to violence, whereas they feel that democracy will create peace.
Prescriptions
Liberal values are also reflected in the policy recommendations and suggestions, also known as prescriptions. One could argue that most policy documents from the Dutch- and American government, can be seen as a prescription because they provide political action and policy recommendations that are based on liberal values. However, the prescriptive statement becomes more visible when the Dutch government describes the main goal of the peacebuilding mission in Afghanistan:
“A relevant factor in the peace and reconciliation process is the outcome of the upcoming parliamentary and district elections . . . . After all, successful elections reaffirm the legitimacy of the Afghan state towards the various armed groups” (Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken, 2018a, p. 4).
This quotes shows that the main goal of the peacebuilding mission in Afghanistan is based on organising elections. The Dutch government argues that “creating a stable and democratic country that offers space and rights to its own people, and that contributes to regional stability and the prevention of radicalization and terrorism” (Rijksoverheid, 2014, p. 5). Besides, aiming for organizing elections is a reoccurring goal for Dutch peacebuilding missions. “the Dutch government argues that the presidential election in Mali will contribute to regional stability and the prevention of radicalization and terrorism” (Rijksoverheid, 2014, p. 5). So by referring to the goals of their peacebuilding mission, the Dutch government makes policy suggestions and/or recommendations, which are based on the Western ideology. By focussing on democracy, defeating terrorism and by organizing elections, the Dutch government emphasizes several liberal values.
The prescriptive statement is also visible in peacebuilding missions from the American government. When looking at the implementation of liberal values in peacebuilding missions, it seems that the American government does not share the same tactics as the Netherlands. When the
25 American government argues how they want to create a long-lasting peace in a host country, they mostly refer to military action: “We must confront terrorists with the combined power of America’s strengths, our strong military, our law enforcement and intelligence communities” (United States of America, 2018, p. 1) and “we were still having major manned gun, tank rounds, and combined arms in downtown. Hit with more than one hundred insurgents surging on twelve- to fifteen-man positions” (Department of the Army, 2014, p. 82). So although the Dutch and the American government share the same values, these values are being reflected in two different ways. Whereas the Dutch do emphasize that their main goal is organizing elections, the Americans mostly refer to military action. This contradiction can be used to look at the statement from different scholars who argue that the American peacebuilding approach is a hard-handed approach compared to the Dutch peacebuilding approach. (Berdal, 1994; Joffe, 1997; Zaalberg, 2013). Looking at the prescriptions can be used to confirm this statement because even though both countries share the same Western ideology and values, they do not share the same tactics when trying the implement these values in a post-conflict zone.
By looking at the three levels of thoughts (values, description and prescription), the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content helped to explore which ideas and ideologies exists within Western peacebuilding approaches. It seems that within Western peacebuilding approaches, liberal values are being emphasized on different levels. The appreciation of democracy, the rule of law and the governance control refer to a certain Western ideology that is embedded in liberalism.
Table 2. VDP-triad from the Western peacebuilding approach
Values Descriptions Prescriptions
Fundamental level
‘Defending the democratic values and human rights, the rule of law and reforming local security
institutions’
Describing terrorists as their common enemy
Creating a stable and democratic country that offers space and rights to its own people, and that contributes to regional stability and the prevention of radicalization and terrorism
26 In other words, when using the VDP-triad and looking at the ideas that are portrayed as neutral within the documents, one could argue that there exists a Western ideology which is mainly based on liberalism, and this vision is also reflected within Western peacebuilding missions.
However, this Western ideology is reflected in two different ways. Although the American and the Dutch peacebuilding approach fall both into the label of Western peacebuilding approaches, they do show some differences. They both believe that implementing liberal values in a post-conflict situation in the Global South will lead to a peaceful situation and they both believe that their liberal set of ideas will help to govern states and to create peace. But they differ in the way their peacebuilding missions are shaped. Whereas liberal values are reflected in Dutch peacebuilding missions in both the value statements, descriptions and descriptions, these liberal values are not being described in the descriptive statement from the American government. This means that although the value statements and descriptions did show the reflections of liberal values in their missions, these values are not reflected in their policy recommendations. Summarized, although the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideologies established a certain Western ideology in both countries, this ideology is reflected in two different ways in both American and Dutch peacebuilding missions.
27
4. The ‘South African’ approach
South Africa’s growing political role within the region, peacebuilding has become an important issue. The purpose of this chapter will be to clarify the ideas behind the South African peacebuilding approach. This will be done through qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content to establish a certain set of ideas or ideologies, and explore how this set of ideas fits into the South African peacebuilding approach. This will be done by analysing policy documents written by the South African government, concerning South African peacebuilding missions and the PCRD framework.
South Africa’s interests in peacebuilding can be explained by their growing geopolitical power and, also by national interests: “South Africa has an interest in preserving regional peace and stability in order to promote trade and development and to avoid the spill-over effects in the neighbourhood” (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1999, p. 20). The South African government feels that regional peace and stability will contribute to their ambition to become a regional player in the continent.
“South Africa’s approach to peace, security and development in Africa is rooted in several pillars, including the country’s history and transition to democracy, its own perception of its global position and domestic socio-economic considerations. South Africa has historically placed emphasis on its peace and security approaches to enhance its global presence and influence” (Carvalho, 2018a, p. 4).
Because of South Africa’s historical background, their ambition to grow as a regional player and because of socio-economic considerations South Africa has a growing interest in peacebuilding (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1999, p. 19). In general, peacebuilding approaches from the Global South emphasize the local community, local ownership, local contextual dynamics, south-south cooperation and they are need-driven (Call & Coning, 2017). This is a result of the colonial oppression in the African region. It was only from 1960 that the Africans start gaining control over their own continent. The national struggles for political independence stimulated a nationalist movement in the continent (Adoghame, 2018). Thomas Hodgkin writes that “the solid basis of African nationalism is the revolt against European colonial theory” (Hodgkin, 1957, p.1). To put it differently, the common struggle against colonialism, the international slave trade and white-dominated territories in the continent have laid the foundation for the Pan-Africanism movement.
28 The Pan-Africanism movement can be seen as a revolutionary movement for the “unification and total liberation of the African continent” (Adoghame, 2008, p. 9).
“The Pan African vision has as its basic premise that we the people of African descent throughout the globe constitute a common cultural and political community by virtue of our origin in Africa and our common racial, social and economic oppression. It further maintains that political, economic, and cultural unity is essential among all Africans, to bring about effective action for the liberation and progress of the African peoples and nations” (Nantumbu, 1998, p.2).
This quote argues that political, economic and cultural unity is essential to bring progress for the African population and continent. In other words, the Pan-Africanism vision is a political movement that wants to promote unity on the African continent. Adoghame (2007, p. 7) stated that “every kind of unity that promises to lead to increased capacity of Africans to take the full control over their destinies will be consistent with the Africanism movement”. Although the Pan-African movement originally started out as a political movement, it manifested itself as a system of beliefs and an organizational framework. Andrain (1962, p. 10) argues that “as a system of beliefs, Pan-Africanism may be considered an ideology and symbolic goals. The Pan-Africanism does not constitute a completely elaborated, comprehensive, or closed system of knowledge. Rather, Pan-Africanism consists of community beliefs about the nature of society, its history, and the goals of that society”. In other words, even though the Pan-Africanism movement started out as a political movement, it is also possible see the African movement as an ideology. The Pan-African ideology can be reflected in different ways within South Pan-African peacebuilding missions. First, focusing on the African community and creating a stable African region in order to create African unity, can be seen as a reflection of the Pan-African ideology. Because, the empowerment of local communities can be seen as a tool to create African unity (Andrain, 1962). Second, the creation of an African peacebuilding framework can also be seen as a reflection of the Pan-African ideology because it relates to “Africans to take the full control over their destinies” (Adoghame, 2007, p. 7). This means that the Pan-African movement and the corresponding Pan-African ideology can be found within the South African peacebuilding approach in different ways.
So when looking at the broader socio-political and historical context it seems that the African history is dominated by the Western hegemony, suppression by Western states, discrimination and
29 dislocation of African people. Because of South Africa’s history that was characterized by Western suppression, it is understandable that the South African Government is sceptical towards Western peacebuilding approaches. This scepticism has led to a South African peacebuilding approach which is based around the Pan-Africanism movement, instead of Western ideology. In order to get a better understanding of the South African peacebuilding approach, it will be important to get an overview concerning South Africa’s involvement in peacebuilding missions. This will be done critically looking at the Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development (PCRD) framework and exploring how South Africa’s vision towards peacebuilding is reflected in the PCRD framework. Afterwards, the qualitative analysis of ideas and content will be used to look at the values, descriptions and prescriptions that are shown within the policy documents. The ideas and/or ideologies that are established during the qualitative analysis of ideas and ideological content will be applied to South African peacebuilding missions and the PCRD framework.
4.1 The PCRD framework
South Africa has a broad approach to peacebuilding, and mostly uses the concept of PCRD. The PCRD is a framework from the African Union (AU) and was established in December 2003 (Lucey & Gida, 2014). The AU describes the PCRD as a “means for consolidating peace and promoting sustainable development, growth and regeneration in countries emerging from conflict” (Kok, 2015, p. 2). What makes the PCRD framework special, is the fact that previous peacekeeping operations in the African continent, had all been dependent on foreign funding and foreign political agendas, whereas the PCRD only relied on funding from the AU and its member states. In other words, the PCRD framework can be seen as a real African based a led framework to peacebuilding (Lucey & Gida, 2014). Looking at policy documents related to the PCRD framework will contribute to explore how this ideology exists within South African peacebuilding missions. In his article The African Union and Security Sector Reform, Tadesse (2010) states that the PCRD was formulated as a guideline that can be applied to post-conflict situations. The PCRD framework is conceived as a tool to prevent relapses in violence and help to address the root cause of conflict because most post-conflict countries in Africa have “a fragile peace and fall back into conflict within five years of signing a peace agreement” (African Union, 2006; Tadesse, 2010). The PCRD framework sees peacebuilding as its most important activity, this includes:
30 “The restoration of the rule of law, establishment and development of democratic institutions, and the preparation, organisation and supervision of election in the member states. For countries affected by violent conflict, the mandate is extended and includes activities such as the consolidation of peace agreements and establishing conditions of political, social and economic reconstruction of society ad government institutions” (Lucey & Gida, 2014).
Some of these goals were clearly reflected in policy documents from the South African government. Especially addressing the root causes of a conflict is a point that occurred several times in the analysis. In the White paper on South African participation in missions, the African government states that “South Africa would obviously prefer to contribute to those initiatives that aim to address the underlying cause of conflict and not simply short-term containment” (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1999, p. 19). In order to address these root causes, the PCRD framework focuses on security, political governance and transition, human rights, justice and reconciliation, humanitarian assistance, reconstruction and socio-economic development and gender (Lucey & Gida, 2014). This vision of peacebuilding is in line with the definition of peacebuilding that was given by the South African government. They feel that peacebuilding involves the “inculcation of respect for human rights and political pluralism, state-building, promoting economic growth and equity” (Department of Foreign Affairs, 1999, p. 19).
Like Lucey & Gida (2014) mentioned, peacebuilding is an important activity that exists of peace on multiple levels. Therefore, peacekeeping operations should be underpinned by five core principles (African Union, 2006; Lucey & Gida, 2014):
1. Prioritizing African agencies; 2. The promotion of local ownership; 3. Equity and non-discrimination; 4. Cooperation and cohesion;
5. Capacity building for sustainability.
The PCRD tries to adhere to these five principles, this becomes clear when the government refers to African peace missions and the expectations that they have for these missions:
