=
=
African Solutions to African Problems?
Legitimacy issues of the African Union on Peacekeeping in Somalia
Sudi Suleiman | s1630318
Supervisor: Dr. Elke Devroe
Second Reader: Prof. dr. E. Bakker
MSc Crisis and Security Management
Master Thesis
Thesis concerning the role and legitimacy of the
African Union as a peacekeeping organization in
Somalia
by
Sudi Suleiman
FACULTY OF GOVERNANCE AND GLOBAL AFFAIRS
UNIVERSITY OF LEIDEN
MSc CRISIS AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT
SUPERVISOR: DR. ELKE DEVROE
WORDS: 26594
Date:
June 9, 2016
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to critically examine to what extent the African Union can be called a legitimate organization for peacekeeping in Somalia. Firstly, this thesis looks into the theoretical processes of peacekeeping and peacekeeping legitimacy. Subsequently, this work offers background information on the conflict environment of Somalia and former peacekeeping efforts in the region, before analyzing the role, achievements, dilemmas and legitimacy of the current African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM). The study has been conducted through document analysis, theoretical analysis and a single test-interview. Adopting Ian Clark’s framework for ‘peacekeeping legitimacy’, the study finds that legitimacy for a peacekeeping operation does not only provide the basis for consent, but also generates support from the local community, which AMISOM is significantly lacking. This thesis argues that the legitimacy of peacekeeping personnel is founded on the performance and effectiveness of a peacekeeping operation. Legitimacy in the eyes of the local population and local actors significantly impacts the success and effectiveness of a peace operation. Therefore, this thesis offers various recommendations on how to increase AMISOM’s legitimacy and on how other international actors could perhaps contribute to the peace process in Somalia.
Foreword
This thesis was written for the Master Degree Public Administration: Crisis and Security Management at the University of Leiden. It is the result of my short-lived one-year Master, which I have thoroughly enjoyed. The Master program focuses on security studies in its broadest sense and includes topics such as the threat of terrorism, civil war, natural disasters, transnational organized crime, etc. The subject of this thesis, peacekeeping in Somalia, falls within the scope of this program, because pursuing peace and resolving conflicts relate to important aspects of human society and is in line with the research area of the master. My interest in this academic area has given me the motivation to continue and pursue my degree. Today, I am looking forward to graduating and hope to use my newfound knowledge to contribute to the safety and security of society.
This thesis reflects the support and involvement of several individuals. First of all, I owe a great deal to my promoter and supervisor Dr. Elke Devroe and I am very grateful for her guidance and assistance. In the course of the thesis I have changed my topic, research direction and research questions several times, however she reacted with patience to my twists and turns, by offering constructive feedback, encouragement and suggestions for how to continue on. Secondly, my father Ahmed Suleiman, who was born and raised in Somalia, generously contributed his ideas. The combination of his grass-rooted knowledge and existing literature has inspired me to explore issues related to the conflict in Somalia. Furthermore, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Marco Hekkens, the EUCAP Nestor’s Head of Field Office Hargeisa, responsible for EU’s capacity building efforts in the Horn of Africa, who took the time to talk with me and share his perspectives. His insights, operational knowledge, generosity and feedback, has given the thesis a sense of direction. Lastly, this project would not have been possible without my biggest cheerleaders: my friends and family. Their support, encouragement, tolerance and patience during periods of my absence, has truly paid off.
Table of Content
Abstract iv
Foreword v
Chapter 1: Introduction 11
1.1 Background to the research subject 12
1.2 Purpose of the research 14
1.3 Research objectives 16
1.4 Relevance of the study 17
1.5 Thesis outline 17
Chapter 2: Theoretical Framework 19
2.1 What is peacekeeping? 20
2.2 Conceptualization of theoretical concepts 22
2.2.1 Peacekeeping 22
2.2.2 Peacekeeping legitimacy 23
2.3 The evolution of peacekeeping 26
2.4 Peacekeeping theories 27
2.4.1 Liberal peace theory 27
2.4.2 Global Culture and Peace Operations 28
2.4.3 Cosmopolitanism 29
2.4.4 Critical theory 30
2.5 Peacekeeping models 31
2.5.1 Classical peacekeeping: 1st generation 31
2.5.2 Multidimensional peacekeeping: 2nd generation 32
2.6 African Union’s conceptual peacekeeping framework 34
2.7 Literature review 38
2.7.1 Peacekeeping in Africa 38
2.7.2 Third Party Interventions 39
2.8 Conclusion 41
Chapter 3: Research Design 42
3.1 Research questions 44
3.2 Operationalization 44
3.2.1 Main research question 44
3.2.2 Sub-question 1 44
3.2.3 Sub-question 2 45
3.2.4 Sub-question 3 45
3.2.5 Sub-question 4 46
3.2.6 Sub-question 5 48
3.3 Research design: single case study 49
3.4 Triangulation of methods 49
3.4.1 Data collection and data exploitation 49
Chapter 4: Problem Situation: Peacekeeping in Somalia 51
4.1 Region of interest: Somalia 52
4.2 International Efforts in the Somali Conflict 55 4.3 Regional Efforts in the Somali Conflict 56
4.4 Problem situation 59
Chapter 5: Results 61
5.1 How can the conflict situation in Somalia be described? 62 5.1.1 Background of the conflict: Governance without Government 62 5.2. What is African Union’s role in the prospect for peace in Somalia? 68 5.2.1. AU’s mandate in Somalia: The ‘Peace’ Process 68 5.2.2. Troop-contributing member-states 72
5.2.3. AU’s Partners 77
5.3 What are the recognized achievements and pitfalls of AMISOM? 79 5.3.1. The absence of violent conflict 79 5.3.2. The presence of institution building activities and social recovery 80 5.3.3. No attention for long-term stability and peace 82 5.3.4. Internal and external dilemmas 84 5.4 Does AMISOM perform its tasks with political consensus, legality and moral
authority? 89
5.4.1. Political consensus 89
5.4.2. Legality 90
5.4.3. Moral authority 91
5.5 Does the Somali population consent with AMISOM’s presence? 93
5.5.1. Local perception of AMISOM 93
5.5.2. SNA perception of AMISOM 95
Chapter 6: Conclusion and Discussion
97
6.1. To what extent can the African Union be called a legitimate organization for leading peacekeeping operations in Somalia, and why? 98
6.2. Recommendations 100
6.3. Discussion 103
References
104
List of Figures and Illustrations
Figure 1: Map of Somalia 52
Figure 2: Clan Structure of Somalia 54
Figure 3: Political Map of Somalia 66
List of Abbreviations
AFISMAT AFRICAN UNION LED INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT
MISSION IN MALI
AFISM-CAR AFRICAN UNION LED INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT
MISSION IN CAR
AL ARAB LEAGUE
AMIB AFRICAN UNION MISSION IN BURUNDI
AMIS AFRICAN UNION MISSION IN SUDAN
AMISEC AU MISSION FOR SUPPORT ELECTION IN THE
COMOROS
AMISOM AFRICAN UNION MISSION IN SOMALIA
APSA AFRICAN PEACE AND SECURITY ARCHITECTURE
AU AFRICAN UNION
CAR CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC
CSIC COUNCIL OF SOMALIA ISLAMIC COURTS
DPKO DEPARTMENT OF PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS
ECOWAS ECONOMIC COMMUNITY OF WEST-AFRICAN STATES
EU EUROPEAN UNION
FGS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF SOMALIA
ICU ISLAMIC COURTS UNION
IGAD INTER-GOVERNMENTAL ASSOCIATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT
IGASOM IGAD PEACE SUPPORT MISSION TO SOMALIA
OAU ORGANIZATION OF AFRICAN UNITY
OIS ORGANIZATION OF ISLAMIC STATE
MAES AU ELECTORAL SECURITY ASSISTANCE TO THE
COMOROS
MIOC AU MILITARY OBSERVER MISSION IN THE COMOROS
NFD NORTHERN FRONTIER DISTRICT
PKO(s) PEACEKEEPING OPERATION (S)
REC-LRA REGIONAL-COOPERATION INITIATIVE FOR THE
SADC SOUTHERN-AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
SNM SOMALI NATIONAL MOVEMENT
SPM SOMALI PATRIOTIC MOVEMENT
SRRC SOMALIA RECONCILIATION AND RESTORATION
COUNCIL
SSDF SOMALI SALVATION DEMOCRATIC FRONT
TFG TRANSITIONAL FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
TNG TRANSITIONAL NATIONAL GOVERNMENT
UIC UNION OF ISLAMIC COURTS
UK UNITED KINGDOM
UN UNITED NATIONS
UNAMID AU-UN HYBRID MISSION IN DARFUR
UN CHARTER UNITED NATIONS CHARTER
UNOSOM I UNITED NATION MISSION IN SOMALIA I UNOSOM II UNITED NATION MISSION IN SOMALIA II
US UNITED STATES
USC UNITED SOMALI CONGRESS
The introductory chapter’s purpose is to provide an overview of the master thesis. To place the thesis in context, a brief background of the research subject will be given, followed by an outline of the purpose of this thesis, the main research question, the research objectives, relevance and the primary aims of each chapter.
1.1. Background of the research subject
In its protracted history, this world has experienced an extensive amount of both man-made and natural disasters. Despite the fact that numerous natural catastrophes were impossible to prevent, the artificial, or man-made disasters are primarily caused and often controlled by human beings. War, irrespective its underlying cause or nature, is preserved as the number one devastating man-made phenomenon, frequently taking place in various parts of the world. According to the United Nations (UN), reported in the UN Charter (1945), the first half of the 20th century, or more specific, the first two world wars have ‘‘brought untold sorrow to mankind’’. The international community assimilated lessons from World War I and World War II and has endeavoured to prevent and reduce global conflicts ever since. Thus, the international community established the UN in 1945, with the purpose of, ‘‘inter alia’’, protecting new generations from the plague of war.
Following the end of the Cold War, the international community became actively involved in fostering international peace and stability (Stan, 2004: 3). Consequently, the UN has concentrated on conserving the international peace and security within the complexities of the international political stage. Nevertheless, despite UN’s efforts, the contemporary world is continuously being confronted by atrocious internal and external (armed) conflicts.
As a measure of its principal aim, which is to provide global peace and security, the United Nations has been establishing peacekeeping operations (PKOs) in regions affected by war. Peacekeeping was widely seen as ‘‘a panacea for the difficulties of countries emerging from conflict, which led to a burgeoning in the number, size and scope of peace operations1’’.
As of today, the UN is deployed in 16 different peacekeeping operations. The UN is currently active in Kosovo, Haiti, Democratic Republic of Congo, Lebanon, Syria, Mali, Liberia, etc. (UN, 2016a). However, despite succeeding in past and current PKOs (UN, 2016b), the UN peacekeeping operations in Somalia in the 1990’s are often labelled as a historical example where the organization failed in maintaining peace and security. The peacekeeping mission in Somalia was deployed into stages: 1) UNOSOM I 1992-1993 and 2) UNOSOM II 1993-1995. Although both of these missions ultimately failed, they provide opportunities to reflect and create new strategies for future peacekeeping undertakings in Somalia.
Preserving safety and security remains to be a fundamental challenge not solely to the United Nations (UN), but correspondingly to major multilateral institutions such as the European Union (EU), African Union (AU) and League of Arab Nations (AL). According to the Council of the European Union (2003), conflict and violence are factors that contribute to decreasing economic development and threaten democratic values, human rights, and basic freedoms. For that reason, the international community has significant obligations to uphold peace and stability in conflicted areas.
A regional entity that complements the UN and the EU by similarly establishing PKOs in Africa is the African Union (AU), an organization that consists out of all 54 African member states, with the exception of Morocco. The primary purpose of setting up the AU in 2002 was to engage African countries into a comprehensive security agenda that would concentrate on ‘‘African solutions to African problems’’. In 2003, The African Union initiated its primary peacekeeping operation in Burundi, called AMIB: African Union Mission in Burundi. Following that PKO, additional peacekeeping operations in Sudan, Mali, Central Africa Republic (CAR), etc. were undertaken, planned and implemented solely by the AU; demonstrating the commitment of African countries in countering crisis.
1.2. Purpose of the research
When reflecting upon Africa’s protracted effort to eradicate regional and local conflicts in the decolonization period, peacekeeping can be perceived as one of the leading challenges of the continent. Even though some peacekeeping successes can be cited, much more is needed to entirely eradicate the scourges of war and internal conflicts in Africa.
Over the years, the African Union has attempted to prove its capability in commanding peacekeeping operations. Even though the AU has played a central role in preventing conflicts and violence, emerging evidence shows that it is also confronted by many challenges (Williams & Hashi: 29), which acts in concert to deteriorate its conflict prevention capabilities. Peacekeepers in Africa are often tasked with robust mandates, which include: citizen protection, counterinsurgency operations and humanitarian assistance, without having the adequate means and resources to deliver on those requirements. Multilateral organizations that utilize troops frequently face challenges connected to proper training, relationships with host governments, sexual abuse, etc.
These challenges have raised important questions on the ‘legitimacy’ of peacekeeping operations. Michael Mersiades (2005) argues that peacekeeping legitimacy is a concept that ‘‘can be used to understand relationships between (foreign) military forces and civilians. For peacekeepers, legitimacy explains why a society would be supportive of, and obedient to, a foreign-armed force interfering in its affairs’’. According to Ian Clark (2007), in his book ‘Legitimacy in International Society’, legitimacy, is composed of three interlinked factors: political consensus, legality and moral authority. Being well aware of the fact that legitimacy has different meanings through various academic disciplines, this thesis will employ Clark’s framework, because he specifically concentrates on ‘peacekeeping legitimacy’.
It has been noted that shortfalls in a peacekeeping operation’s legitimacy can severely undermine its efficacy. The legitimacy of contemporary events – including the wars in Iraq and Kosovo – the aftermath of 9/11 war on terror, and cases of humanitarian intervention – have been frequently debated around the world. And yet the academic field of International Relations has largely neglected this concept (Clark, 2007). Misconduct by peacekeepers and chronic delays and prolongation of operations – have
raised questions about the legitimacy of some PKOs and of peacekeeping in general (Wiharta, 2009: 95).
In early 2007, the African Union launched a peacekeeping operation in Somalia
'AMISOM’, which stands for African Union Mission in Somalia was mandated to
conduct peacekeeping measures in Somalia and to stabilize the situation in the country, which has been in a lawless state since the collapse of the government in 1991. However, the AU has continuously extended its mandate in Somalia since 2007 and has yet to establish an adequate exit strategy. The operation was initially mandated to last six months to be subsequently handed over to the United Nations; however, more than nine years later the African Union is still involved in leading the peacekeeping operations in Somalia. Therefore, the question remains: what is the reason for the extended duration of this mission? The purpose of this thesis is to critically examine and explain the rationale behind the African Union’s peacekeeping efforts in Somalia. After briefly reflecting on the UN peacekeeping failures in Somalia in the early 90’s, the currently on-going African Union Mission in Somalia and its impact on this country will be assessed. The guiding principle for this study is to examine whether or not the African Union is legitimate enough to contribute to safety and security in Somalia.
In the process of this study, therefore, a question that will be answered is: ‘‘to what extent
can the African Union be called a legitimate organization for leading peacekeeping operations in Somalia, and why?’’
By being attentive towards some of the key issues relating to the legitimacy of PKOs, such as the shortfalls relating to financing, equipment and personnel, this thesis aims to investigate the legitimacy of AMISOM. Assessing the effect and impact of PKOs is tremendously complicated, as these often exist within an extremely complex architecture of partners and actors, organizations and events. However, this thesis does not intend to provide a full assessment of the effectiveness of AMISOM, but will provide an overview on their role, achievements and legitimacy.
1.3. Research objectives
Regional and non-regional actors have interacted in Somalia’s civil war throughout its entire conflict period. However their multiplicity and assortment of agendas, often centered on self-interest, have hindered countless resolution efforts. The African Union has been the primary peacekeeping force in Somalia since 2007. For this reason I will critically analyze to what extent AMISOM has contributed to peace in Somalia since its engagement; this is particularly important to investigate since the country continues to remain in an insecure state. The overarching objective is to retrieve to what extent the African Union is a legitimate agency in managing peacekeeping operations in Somalia. To answer this, an analysis will be conducted with focus on the conflict situation in Somalia, the mandate of AMISOM and the achievements and pitfalls of AMISOM. Furthermore, the question whether or not the African Union executes its mandate with political consensus, legality and moral authority will be explored. Lastly, I will assess the extent to which the Somali population consents with the peacekeepers’ presence. This will be done to gauge the impact of the African Union, with particular emphasis on the efficacy of the AU’s involvement on peacekeeping in Somalia.
Based on the analysis and results, this thesis will offer recommendations in regards to future peacekeeping undertakings in the country. Specific emphasis will moreover be placed on how other international actors could possibly influence the future prospects of Somalia.
1.4. Relevance of the study
After the decolonization period and the end of the Cold War many civil wars instigated in Africa. Due to the increased conflict situations, the necessity for comprehensive peacekeeping operations in the continent increased (Cilliers & Gregmills, 1999). The UN is a leading player in peacekeeping operations, and more than half of the PKOs of which the UN has been involved in were on the African continent (UN, 2016a). UNOSOM I and UNOSOM II, however, completely failed to comply with its mandate in Somalia (Yussuf, 2014: 10). The African Union has mandated a peacekeeping mission in Somalia since 2007. This thesis will investigate the current role and legitimacy of the African Union peacekeeping operation in Somalia. This study is therefore expected to benefit policy makers, scholars, and analysts in framing a structure that entails the general challenges and dilemma’s of peacekeeping in Somalia in order to foster successful peacekeeping in the future. Furthermore, it is anticipated that this study’s conclusions could instigate further research in the field of peacekeeping in Somalia and the specific role of the African Union.
1.5. Thesis outline
In the next chapters the reader will find the following information:
Chapter 2: The second chapter will disclose the theoretical framework that is adopted in this study and provides information on the theoretical concepts. It will firstly offer a conceptualization of peacekeeping and (peacekeeping) legitimacy, and subsequently give some insights on the theories of peacekeeping. Furthermore, an outline of the classical peacekeeping model and multidimensional peacekeeping model will follow. Moreover, a brief overview of the African Union’s conceptual peacekeeping framework will be given. Lastly, a literature review on prior works in regards to peacekeeping in Africa and why third parties decide to engage in internal conflicts will follow.
Chapter 3: The third chapter will offer information on the methodological framework of this thesis. The purpose of this chapter is to explain how the research questions will be answered. This will be illustrated by means of an operationalization scheme for each question. This chapter will also feature the research method, operationalization and the means of data collection and exploitation.
Chapter 4: This chapter will present contextual insights on the area of interest, which is Somalia. Followed by an historical outline of previous international and regional peacekeeping efforts in the conflict-stricken country. After this guiding information, I will conclude with the problem situation.
Chapter 5: This chapter consists out the analysis of the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia (AMISOM) and will concentrate on the sub-questions described in Chapter 3. The following points will be analyzed: 1) the conflict situation in Somalia; 2) the role of the AU in Somalia; 3) the achievements and pitfalls of AMISOM; 4) the extent to which the African Union executes its mandate with political consensus, legality and moral authority, and 5) the extent to which the Somali population consents with AMISOM.
Chapter 6: The final chapter contains a conclusive summary of all the findings and will provide an answer to the leading research question. Following the conclusion, some recommendations in regards to future peacekeeping efforts in Somalia will be given.
In order to provide an up to date body of knowledge, the following chapter will concentrate on the concept and theories of peacekeeping. In the first paragraph I will elaborate on the definition of peacekeeping. The second paragraph will explain the theoretical notions of important concepts. In the third paragraph the history of peacekeeping will be analysed. The fourth paragraph outlines the 4 main theories used in peacekeeping, namely: liberal peace, global culture and peace, cosmopolitanism and critical theory. Moreover, an outline of peacekeeping models will be provided in the fifth paragraph, as it is important to distinguish classical peacekeeping from multidimensional peacekeeping to understand the context of contemporary peacekeeping operations. The sixth paragraph provides a brief overview of the African Union’s conceptual peacekeeping framework. Lastly, this chapter ends with a literature review on peacekeeping in Africa and on why third parties decide to engage in internal conflicts.
2.1.What is peacekeeping?
Before defining the concept of peacekeeping, it is important to understand the definition of peace. This thesis will adopt the concept of peace as explained by Johan Galtung (1975), in which ‘‘peace’’ is not solely considered as the lack of war, but additionally adopts ‘‘positive peace’’, which includes the presence of food and uncontaminated water, security, education, etc. This concept is entrenched in the notion that solely terminating violence while disregarding the unprecedented social and political circumstances, will not contribute to long-lasting peace.
According to Whittle (2015), peacekeeping is primarily defined as a method of the international’s community to consolidate peace in areas with armed conflict. The United Nations (2006) defined peacekeeping as ‘‘a unique and dynamic instrument developed by the organization as a way to help countries torn by conflict to create the conditions for lasting peace''. Cox (1967: 4) defined peacekeeping as “an extraordinary military art because it calls for the use of soldiers not to fight and win, but to prevent fighting, to maintain cease-fires, and to provide order while negotiations are being conducted”. Indicating that peacekeeping is an essential tool that could preserve tranquillity in regions affected by armed conflicts (United Nations, 2006). According to Ojanen (2006: 48) the scope of peacekeeping has become more extensive and comprises out of three principal objectives: ‘‘to maintain peace, security and stability; to construct development and
democracy for the long-term, and to help the transition from conflict and violence to durable peace’’.
Classical peacekeeping operations are founded on three principles: the consensus of disputed countries, the neutrality of the peacekeepers, and the absence of force, only when used in self-defence (Tsagouria, 1995). Therefore, peacekeepers were only deployed to conflict areas in agreement with the relevant parties (Bothe & Dörschel, 2001). As reported in the Handbook on United Nations Multidimensional Peacekeeping Operations ‘‘peacekeeping is based on the principle that an impartial presence on the ground can ease tensions between hostile parties and create space for political negotiations.’’ Moreover, it stated that ‘‘peacekeeping can help bridge the gap between the cessation of hostilities and durable peace, but only if the parties to a conflict have the political will needed to reach the goal.’’
The UN’s Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO, 2007) classified ‘peacekeeping’ as part of its five main peace and security initiatives, which can be seen in the following table.
Concept Definition
Conflict prevention ‘Includes structural and diplomatic measures to prevent disputes from developing into violent conflict’.
Peacemaking ‘The use of diplomatic measures to bring hostile parties to a negotiated agreement’.
Peacekeeping ‘The use of the military, police, and civilian personnel to lay the foundations of sustainable peace’.
Peace enforcement ‘The use of military and other measures to enforce the will of the UN Security Council’.
Peacebuilding ‘Includes a range of steps aimed at reducing the risk of lapsing or relapsing into conflict.’
2.2.Conceptualization of theoretical concepts
2.2.1. Peacekeeping
According to MacQueen (2006: 234), peacekeeping operations have emerged and changed tremendously since the commencement of the Cold War. The concept is primarily perceived as synonymous to UN peacekeeping operations, as the majority of PKOs worldwide have been conducted under UN mandates (Cox, 1967: 7). Diehl (1994: 1) stated that peacekeeping continues to face challenges in regards to its conceptual meaning and remains to be an ‘undefined, contentious and disorganized international operation.' For that reason, MacQueen (2006) argued that peacekeeping operations are ambiguous.
While various scholars have characterized peacekeeping operations as uncertain or controversial, PKOs have emerged as a primary political instrument of the international community in persevering international peace and stability (Cox, 1967: 7). According to Diehl (1994: 2) political tensions as a result from the Cold War strengthened peacekeeping mechanisms. Soon after the commencement of the UN, the first PKO was deployed in the Middle East in 1948. In the early stages of UN PKOs, the emphasis was laid on monitoring ceasefires, maintaining buffer zones and separating disputed forces (Siradag, 2009: 12). In contrast, today, the scope of peacekeeping has transformed and has become more complicated (United Nations, 2008), as the mandates have become more robust and often include democratic transitions, humanitarian aid, etc. (Diehl, 1994: 2). Following this development, the UN re-defined peacekeeping as ‘‘an operation involving civilian and military personnel, to monitor cease-fires in the conflict areas, maintain international peace and security” (United Nations, 2006). The UN (1992) has categorized the concept of peacekeeping into three categories: 1) Overseeing peace agreements and ceasefires; 2) establishing a comprehensive reconciliation between hostile parties, and 3) providing humanitarian relief and citizen protection. The first classification mainly consists out of UN military and civilian personnel, whom are tasked to establish a safer environment by negotiating with diplomats and political officials to maintain peace and stability in the region. The second category is based on multidimensional peacekeeping measures and encompasses PKOs that include regional security, democratic elections, institution building, promoting human rights, basic freedoms and economic development in the conflict-stricken country. The third category
is connected to the international community’s responsibility to address humanitarian crises and protect vulnerable individuals (United Nations, 1992).
2.2.2. Peacekeeping Legitimacy
Peacekeeping legitimacy theories seek to understand why or to what extent a nation, multilateral organization or NGO deserves the obedience and support of the subordinate society (Honderich, 1995: 447). According to Beetham (1991), the key significance of legitimacy is that it conveys a moral dimension to an individual or collective decision to support and obey the state, instead of being merely a result of rational choice. He additionally argues that legitimacy has several advantages for an external actor in internal conflicts, namely: 1) ‘‘a more cooperative and productive population, 2) a reduced need to devote resources to maintain order, and 3) a greater ability for the state to withstand shock or failure’’.
The concept of legitimacy is often used to comprehend the relationship between the state and its inhabitants, however it can similarly be employed to understand the relationship between civilians and (external) military forces (Mersiades, 2005: 206). For peacekeepers or military forces, legitimacy explains for what reason citizens would be obedient towards, and supportive of a foreign military force interfering in their countries’ business. According to Mersiades (2005: 207), peacekeeper legitimacy consists out of a mixture of the bases of legitimacy and the performance or effectiveness of a PKO. The bases of legitimacy, or the social contract, are a key importance to gain obedience and support for the peacekeepers. Performance of peacekeepers is the effectiveness of the peacekeeping force at achieving the tasks indicated in the social contract (Mersiades, 2005: 207).
Once the bases of legitimacy stem from adequate social contracts, and the performance of the peacekeepers contents to these social contracts, a PKO will be seen as legitimate, and will receive consent and support of the local inhabitants and local actors (Mersiades, 2005: 207). Peacekeeping legitimacy is an outcome of a social contract, in which a society will perceive the peacekeepers’ use of force and command legitimate because the peacekeepers are only there for a purpose that is beneficial. That is: to provide safety and security, so that peace may be restored.
However, this is far more complicated that it may seem, because PKOs often involves interactions with numerous actors, which demands multiple social contracts. According to Mersiades (2005: 208), NGO’s, host governments, the local population and warring factions all have their own prospects and expectations in regards to the peacekeepers’ functions. Local citizens may assent to a peacekeeping troop’s presence and authority because their purpose is to provide security, which will enhance the living conditions of these local citizens. Nonetheless, not all actors of a society will assent with the social contract. These actors, often referred to as ‘spoilers’, oppose and seek to undermine the legitimacy of peacekeepers (Stedman, 1997).
Another complicating factor is that values and expectations of the local population and local actors are often not symbolized in the peacekeepers’ mandate, or at the UNSC (Mersiades, 2005: 207). This indicates that ‘operational level’ social contracts are not deliberated during the initial making of the mandates, holding the peacekeepers responsible to establish implicit social contracts with the local population after they deploy. However, it also incites the possibility that the UNSC mandate may diverge from the ground-level social contracts. Nevertheless, these bases of legitimacy, consisting out numerous social contracts with different local actors, will spark consent and effective support for a PKO (Mersiades, 2005: 207). Supposing it is disadvantageous for one individual or group, it may be seen as beneficial to the community or society as a whole. But, developing social contracts does not ensure support: the burden is on the peacekeepers to guarantee that they uphold and realize those social contracts.
Performance is a factor that gives peacekeepers the chance to manage their legitimacy. The most crucial, and most logical factor in peacekeeping legitimacy is the successful fulfillment of the contracts, which usually comes down to providing security and restoring peace. Granted that the peacekeeping force is not respecting the social contracts, the local actors will deem the contract as void, which might result in a diminishing consent to the peacekeepers’ presence. Moreover, it may be possible that social contracts of different local actors may clash, compelling the peacekeepers to decide which front to support. While this may not always be the case, when it does occur, local citizen support is usually considered as more valuable, because of the importance of popular support for peacekeeping initiatives (Mersiades, 2005: 207).
According to Ian Clark (2007), in his book ‘Legitimacy in International Society’, the legitimacy of a peacekeeping operation can be defined by three mutually reinforcing components, namely: ‘political consensus, legality and moral authority’. Political consensus indicates the agreement between the host government and the international community that a peacekeeping operation is required. Both political consensus and legality are generally perceived as key elements to determine the legitimacy of PKOs mandate. The moral authority component of a peacekeeping operation is largely dependent on the behavior of the personnel and peacekeeping troops: to what extent do they adhere to international norms and standards? Wiharta (2009: 96) argued that if one of these elements of legitimacy is undermined, it could have a direct influence on the peacekeeping operations’ effectiveness and success and impede its overall legitimacy. According to Wiharta (2009: 115), peacekeeping success can be severely impeded by the illegitimate characteristics of a mandate or the illegitimate conduct of its personnel. The moral authority of a peacekeeping operation could ensure its local legitimacy. Wrongdoing of an individual peacekeeper could put an entire PKO at risk (Wiharta, 2009: 115).
2.3.The evolution of peacekeeping: from the Cold War
to the Brahimi Report
The concept of peacekeeping was originally used by the former UN Secretary General Dag Hammerskjöld in order to illustrate UNEF I, the first UN Emergency Force. With the establishment of UNEF I, in 1956, approximately 5,000 lightly equipped observers, were deployed to the Sinai to maintain a ceasefire between Israel and Egypt (Oakley, et al., 1998). Formal theories on peacekeeping emerged at a later stage as a result of increasing power politics during the Cold War period. The primary objective of peacekeeping at this time was to prevent the increasing conflict and violence between the superpowers. Moreover, peacekeeping was principally established by Western superpowers as a method of promoting peace and security and upholding economic or other transactional interests. (Martin, 2005:1).
According to Staehle (2006: 18-21), the theory of peacekeeping has experienced three significant evolutions, namely: peacekeeping during the Cold War, after the Cold War and peacekeeping after the Brahimi report. In the midst of the Cold War era, peacekeeping was used mainly to monitor ceasefires and to reduce conflict and violence between superpowers, to reconcile divided communities and to respond to security threats, see appendix 1 for a list of PKOs during the Cold War. Nevertheless, peacekeeping during this period was simple, limited and not an incredibly useful method in mitigating violence and conflicts. Following the Cold War era, what is renowned as the ‘post-Cold War era’, the theory and practice of peacekeeping was enhanced (MacFarlana, 2003: 7).
The post-Cold War era observed a transformation of peacekeeping at two levels, namely: conceptual and operational (Hitchcock, 2003: 38). In this era, peacekeeping tasks were extended by correspondingly implementing peace-building, peace enforcement and peacemaking missions (Sorenson and Wood, 2005:3). Peace building involves (national) institution building as a post-conflict method (Osmancavusoglu, 2000:1) and peace enforcement is the implementation of armed troops to separate hostile combatants and to establish a peace agreement (Domke and Solon, 1993). Lastly, peacemaking is the diplomatic component that is used to terminate the conflicts (Osmancavusoglu, 2000:1). Peacekeeping theory faced another transformation with the formation of ‘The Brahimi
Report’, a report written by Lakhdar Brahimi (2000), who, together with a panel, suggested a framework for reconstructing peacekeeping operations (Durch et al., 2003: 9). Brahimi proposed improvements in three areas of PKOs, namely: 1)’doctrine and strategy’; 2) ‘capacity to manage and reinforce operations’, and 3) ‘rapid and productive deployment’ (Durch, et al., 2003: 10). Moreover, the Report put emphasis on the notion that peacekeeping operations should be ‘beneficial, professional and successful’ (Durch, et al., 2003: 10). According to Siradag (2009: 14), The Brahimi Report broadened the scope of peacekeeping.
2.4. Peacekeeping theories
Peacekeeping has emerged into a complex international responsibility. Peacekeeping operations are founded on theories that can support policy makers and practitioners in comprehending the notion of peacekeeping. According to Bellamy and Williams (2010) in their research ‘‘Understanding Peacekeeping,’’ a distinction can be made out of four theories of peacekeeping, i.e.: liberal peace theory, global cultural theory, cosmopolitanism, and critical theory.
2.4.1. Liberal Peace Theory
According to this theory, a sufficient strategy to guarantee security and durable peace is democracy (Bellamy, et al., 2010). In the liberal peace theory, peacekeepers aspire to enhance sustainable peace by facilitating the construction of democratic societies (Bellamy, et al., 2010). Boulding (1978) has stated that with no hesitation, the liberal peace theory is the most influential theory in regards to peacekeeping operations. The author argued that the theory and practice of peacekeeping missions are undertaken by a frequently unspoken commitment to this theory (Boulding, 1978). The theory is founded on the notion that democracies do not wage wars on other democratic states (Bellamy, et al., 2010). More specifically, democratic states do not involve themselves in war at all, as they are less likely to wage wars than non-democratic states. Moreover, liberal democracies are perceived to have a limited chance of descending into civil war or anarchy (Bellamy, et al., 2010). There is a widespread consensus that adopting liberal peace can reassure that violent conflict between countries can be reduced (Bellamy, et al., 2010). Advocates for this theory have presented two reasons why so. Firstly, democratic models impose controlling institutional restrictions on policy makers and
decision-Democracy impedes the likelihood of civil war primarily because democracy is anchored by ideas that support human rights, non-violence, etc. Secondly, the liberal peace theory is normative and explicates that democratic nations do not fight one another because they acknowledge each other’s legitimacy, and they have a joint interest in protecting international trade, which would be obstructed by war (Bellamy, et al., 2010). The legitimacy that is interlinked with democracy makes it less probable that citizens mobilize arms, limiting the probability of civil wars.
‘‘Democracies don’t attack each other… ultimately the best strategy to ensure our security and to build a durable peace is to support the advance of democracy elsewhere’’.
- US President Bill Clinton, 1994
When associating peacekeeping operations with liberal peace theory, one can argue that in recent history peacekeeping operations have endeavored to create durable peace by endorsing and preserving the fundamentals that reinforce liberal peace (Bellamy, et al., 2010). According to Richmond (2003: 1), these peacekeeping operations try to create durable peace by promoting the formation of democratic societies and free market economies and are frequently supported by Western NGOs. Despite being the dominant model that stresses modern peacekeeping operations, its operational function remains controversial (Bellamy, et al., 2010). For instance, China and various other countries argue that peace operations are ought to be reduced to solely supporting disputing states and other actors to resolve their differences instead of imposing a certain ideology (Yang, 2013).
2.4.2. Global Culture and Peace Operations
According to Roland Paris (2003: 1) in his article: ‘’Peacekeeping and the Constraints of Global
Culture,’’ it is stated that a ‘global culture’ consists out of both formal and informal
societal rules that guide international behavior and outlines the framework of peacekeeping operations in significant ways. The structure and conduct of peace operations do not merely reflect the interests of stakeholders, key players and lessons-learned from previous peacekeeping operations, but also the fundamental norms and values of a global culture (Paris, 2003). The theory legitimizes particular peacekeeping policies while delegitimizing others. Bellamy et al. (2010: 26) stated that ‘‘global culture
helps determine the sorts of activities that are considered appropriate for peace operations and rules out others, irrespective of whether or not they aid progression towards peace. Thus, despite its relatively good post-1945 track record, international trusteeship has been ‘disqualified’ as a policy tool because of its putatively neocolonial overtones’’.
2.4.3. Cosmopolitanism
The cosmopolitan method claims that the endurance of global peace and security involves a particular way of understanding, organizing and conducting peacekeeping operations (Bellamy, et al., 2010). According to Bjorkdahl (2005) cosmopolitanism is perceived as a ‘political alternative’ to nationalism. Over time, cosmopolitanism has emerged as an approach that deals with countless security hazards of the modern world that cannot be resolved within state borders, including transnational terrorism, proliferation of arms, etc. (Bjorkdahl, 2005). In their book: ‘‘Contemporary Conflict
Resolution,’’ Woodhouse and Ramsbotham (2011), have advocated for the development of
cosmopolitan peacekeeping operations consisting out of specially trained and educated military and civilian employees that can protect citizens from harm. Before Woodhouse and Ramsbotham’s research, Mary Kaldor (2006), correspondingly argued that PKOs need to be transformed as ‘instruments of cosmopolitan law enforcement’. Kaldor (2006) argued that while ‘‘the key to resolving new wars is the construction of legitimate political authority, the solution lay in the ‘enforcement of cosmopolitan norms, i.e. enforcement of international humanitarian and human rights law, which would facilitate the protection of citizens and the prosecution of war criminals'' (Kaldor, 2006: 132).
In her framework, Kaldor (1999) expounds that cosmopolitan peacekeeping operations involve the formation of a profession that combines military, soldiering tasks with policing responsibilities. With this, Kaldor (1999), argued that peacekeepers should be allowed to use force against persons that threaten citizens, which would subsequently also threaten the lives of peacekeeping personnel. However, authors such as Paul Hirst (2001: 86) have criticized these ideas as being too simplistic, as contemporary conflicts do not solely involve the classical portrayal of conflict: innocent citizens that are being suppressed by the oppressors. Other recommendation’s made by Kaldor (1999), including the one in which she calls for a new concept of impartiality in peacekeeping
and more emphasis on citizen protection, have been praised and resemble some of the notions outlined by the United Nation’s Brahimi Report in 2000.
2.4.4. Critical Theory
Critical theory is based on the assumption that theory can never be politically neutral but is ‘always for someone and some purpose’ (Bellamy, et al., 2010: 27). Cox (1981: 128) claimed that every theory has a particular perspective. According to Booth (2007: 112), the primary aim of critical theory is human emancipation, i.e., the emancipation of people ''from those oppressions that stop them carrying out what they would freely choose to do, compatible with the freedom of others''. Critical theory scholars aim to stand up for ‘the poor, the disadvantaged, the voiceless, the unrepresented, and the powerless’ (Said, 1994: 84). As within feminist theory, critical theorists find it necessary to examine and illuminate the ideas, experiences and concerns of individuals, whose perspectives are often disregarded, including ‘marginalized groups, ordinary citizens, women and children’ (Bellamy, et al., 2010: 28).
It can be concluded that cosmopolitanism is the most inclusive peacekeeping theory in regards to tasks, responsibilities and capacity of peacekeeping operations in complex and multifaceted conflict situations. According to Durch et al. (2003), cosmopolitanism conforms to the contemporary complex and multidimensional peacekeeping operations that recognize that the notion that effective peacekeeping operations, in which peace-building efforts can prosper, require sufficient numbers of competent, well-educated and well-equipped troops and personnel.
2.5. Peacekeeping models
2.5.1. Classical Peacekeeping: first generation
According to Christopher Clapham (1999) in his article: ‘’The United Nations and
Peacekeeping in Africa,’’ Africa has become by far the most important territory for the UN’s
peacekeeping operations. Africa has consumed a critical influence on defining the boundaries and possibilities of the post-Cold War global order, and the role of the United Nations within it (Clapham, 1999). In regards to post-Cold War efforts, 56 peacekeeping missions have been undertaken since 1988, of which more than half in Africa (UN, 2013). A small portion of these operations, such as the UN’s participation in monitoring the South-African elections in 1994, is often not portrayed as ‘peacekeeping’. However, various other operations, such as in Namibia, Rwanda, Angola, Mozambique, and above all in Somalia, are listed among the UN’s most significant conflict resolution and peacekeeping initiatives following the end of the Cold War (Clapham, 1999).
According to James (1990: 1), the UN established a peacekeeping model, which can be defined as ‘classical peacekeeping.' Classical peacekeeping refers to ‘’the international help, which is sometimes sent to an immediate problem area when disputing states wish, at least for the time being, to live in peace’’. Significant to this concept of peacekeeping is that the peace that is to be kept between disputing countries, often in which the countries have agreed on a conditional basis for peace, is to be policed with the aid of third-party interventions (Clapham, 1999). This arrangement has produced the conditions, which Margaret Carey (1998: 13) has classified as the ‘‘basic principle of peacekeeping’’. 1) ‘‘Peacekeeping should take place with the consent of the states in conflict; 2) peacekeepers should act as impartial brokers; and force should be used only in self-defense’’ (Carey, 1998: 13). The foremost objective of this classical form of peacekeeping is to facilitate measures for a more comprehensive peace settlement (Diehl, 1994: 29).
Classical peacekeeping is also referred to as ‘the first-generation peacekeeping’. The emergence of the so-called first generation of peacekeeping operations was a response to the Suez Crisis (Siradag, 2009: 15). According to Iribarnegaray (2002: 7), the main objective of establishing this first peacekeeping mission was to detach the Suez crisis from the Cold War.
Warner (1995: 181) argued that there are three important fundamentals regarding the first generations peacekeeping operations, namely: ‘‘1) Political independence of the operations; 2) Political independence of the states, and 3) Non-use of force apart from self-defence’’. However, the first generation of peacekeeping also had some complications: 1) a country that would contribute to the PKO could withdraw its contribution; 2) the support to PKOs could affect the superpowers balance of power, and 3) peacekeeping was not perceived as an effective method for keeping peace (Warner, 1995: 182). For that reason, classical peacekeeping missions encountered serious challenges.
Oakley (1998) argued that while several classical peacekeeping missions failed, the majority of peacekeeping operations have positively contributed to mitigating conflict. However, according to Lewis (1993: 25), the international community was unable to establish an international definition of peacekeeping, which resulted into the fact that these classical PKOs could not be fully utilized as a useful instrument. The (UN) peacekeeping policy has developed in the past decade, in reaction to the ineffective response to conflicts such as the one in Rwanda (Brahm, 2005).
2.5.2. Multidimensional Peacekeeping: second generation
As mentioned before, peacekeeping has become more complicated in the post-Cold War era. The emergence of multidimensional peacekeeping or second-generation peacekeeping demonstrated that peacekeeping also required the concentration on economic, political and social issues. For that reason it has recently been perceived as a tremendously complex and unmanageable instrument. This peacekeeping model differs from the first-generation peacekeeping model as it contains more comprehensive objectives in regards to the functions of peacekeeping. This model comprises of military, policing and civilian personnel, and aims to provide humanitarian assistance, support in the transition to a democratic system, institution building, etc. Moreover, some second-generation PKOs allow troops to use force when necessary, whereas this was not permitted in the classical peacekeeping model (Bria, 2007: 44).
According to Arachchi (2002), the UN peacekeeping mission in Cambodia (1992-1993) was the very first successful multidimensional PKO. The UN deployed a mission that
included monitoring of elections, rebuilding economic, political and social institutions and promoting human rights. Moreover, the UN played a significant part in establishing a democratic system in Cambodia (Arachchi, 2002). Additional successful peacekeeping mission under the second-generation peacekeeping model were in: Mozambique (1992-1994), Croatia (1998), Namibia (1989-1990) and El-Salvador (1991-1995).
Aside from UN peacekeeping, African Union, ECOWAS and SADC have similarly backed peacekeeping operations (Agada, 2008: 3). A significant difference between the UN and the African Union is that the AU shifted from the ‘‘principle of non-interference to the principle of non-indifference; which allowed African countries to intervene in internal affairs of African member states in cases of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity''.
The adoption of this method echoed the international debate of the ‘reconceptualization of security’ from a state-centric conception to a normative conception, which concentrates more on individual, human security (Thakur & Newman, 2000: 17). The AU constructed the APSA, a comprehensive security agenda that establishes ‘‘African solutions to African problems’’ (Moller, 2009). Furthermore, the AU has been praised for its distinctive peacekeeping model: rather than waiting for a peace to be kept, the African Union perceives peacekeeping as a prospect to retain peace before keeping it (AU, 2012: 19). The AU adopts a broad approach to security by bringing both military and non-military elements to the table.
The Brahimi Report (2000) underlined the deficiencies of UN peacekeeping and established concrete recommendations for enhancing the success of future peacekeeping operations. The most significant recommendations of the Report were that the UN should strengthen peace-building measures, improve personnel and management support, clearly outline peacekeeping mandates and objectives and increase the political, economic, military, and social components within PKOs (Brahimi Report, 2000). In sum, The Brahimi Report substantiated that the UN peacekeeping method needed reform to gain efficacy in preserving peace and stability in the world.
Besides the UN, the AU was also influenced by the recommendations in the Brahimi Report (2000), in which Brahimi vouched for a more comprehensive peacekeeping approach with more extensive missions and resources (Makunda & Okumu, 2008).
2.6.
African Union’s conceptual peacekeeping framework
The African Union has noted that violence and conflict in Africa have demoralized political and economic stability and the overall dignity of the continent on an international level. The attempts of both international and regional entities on preventing violence, (civil) wars and genocides have not always been fruitful. For instance the crises in Rwanda and The Democratic Republic of Congo revealed that Africa urgently needed to reconstruct its security framework. For that reason, the advent of the African Union was a godsend, as it could take upon a more active position in building safety and security in Africa (Aning, 2005: 1).
The African Union has adopted the ‘‘Protocol Relating to the Establishment of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union", which gives a detailed explanation of AU’s peacekeeping policy and puts emphasis on the fact that the African Union upholds significant responsibilities to prevent and resolve conflicts as a regional superpower in Africa. Moreover, this protocol accentuated that the promotion and perseverance of safety and security are indispensable for strong economic development in Africa (African Union, 2002). To be able to promote peace and security in the continent, the AU created the Peace and Security Council (PSC) in 2002. The PSC is primarily responsible for ‘‘promoting peace, security and stability; prevent conflicts; promoting peace-building and post-conflict reconstruction activities and developing a common defence policy for the Union’’ (African Union, 2002). Furthermore, the AU created the Continental Early Warning System (CEWS), the Panel of the Wise and an African Standby Force (ASF) within the Protocol to be able to strengthen its peacekeeping capabilities (African Union, 2002).
In 2004, the African Union also signed the Solemn Declaration in Libya. This Declaration is renowned as a prominent constituent of the AU's peacekeeping policy, as it was an important step forward to establishing a ‘Common African Defence and Security Policy’ (CADSP). The Declaration emphasized that constructing a common defence and security identity for all African member states is vital when attempting to
promote peace and stability on the continent. The CADSP is comprised out of the following elements: ‘‘1) promotion of peace and security; 2) peace building and peacekeeping, post-conflict rehabilitation, and 3) reconstruction including de-mobilization, disarmament and reintegration’’ (African Union, 2004).
Moreover, ‘The Constitutive Act of the African Union’ contains three fundamental objectives connected to the African Union’s peacekeeping policy. These objectives are: 1) to strengthen and enhance cooperation between (sub) regional and international organizations in order to sustain peace and stability; 2) to strengthen the security framework of African member states, and 3) to strengthen the ‘dignity’ of Africa by maintaining peace and stability on an international level (African Union, 2000).
The Consecutive Act stresses the importance of creating a common security framework in order to preserve peace and stability and perceives it is as the number one priority for durable peace on the continent.
The Consecutive Act Article 4, outlines the following priorities:
In April 2003, AU’s first peacekeeping mission AMIB (African Union Mission in Burundi) was deployed and authorized by The Central Organ of the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management and Resolution of the AU. The main priorities of AMIB were to observe the ceasefire between the disputed parties, preserve peace and stability and to assimilate soldiers into civilian life (Boshoff, 2003: 3). While AMIB was faced by lacking resources, such as: limited troops and financial challenges, the mission had contributed to peace and security in Burundi (Agoagye, 2004: 14-15).
However, according to Vogt (2005: 24-25), in spite of the multidimensional peace approach of AU, African and inter-governmental organizations still stay behind in establishing and deploying extensive peacekeeping missions capacity involving military, police and civilian elements. Vogt (2005) further argues that few examinations of AU conducted peacekeeping missions have indicated that the AU is considerably limited in achieving the extensive demand.
The study conducted by Agoagye (2004) on the African Mission in Burundi, deployed in 2003, contends that the success of the mission was explicitly mixed. It cannot be said that AMIB completely enhanced the implementation of the agreement of ceasefire. Even though the operation contained security threats in some parts of Burundi, the rebels continued to fight. The mission was not able to facilitate the Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) scheme and the reincorporation of the ex-combatants in to the civil society.
In a study conducted on the challenges and constraints of the African Union Mission in Sudan, Appiah-Mensah (2005: 7) argues that since its creation, AMIS has been a restrictive mission. Insufficient troops to protect the civilians, grave operational capacity and logistic deficiencies have engulfed AU’s operation. Therefore, many observers perceived the operation as ineffective and unsuccessful. Further study by Feldam (2008) revealed that the military forces of the AU often did not function up to their responsibilities. In Sudan, AMIS failed to prevent the ongoing war in the Darfur area, due to insufficient funding, insufficient trained armies, ineffective counter terrorism/ insurgency capacities and lack of political willpower among the AU member states to intervene effectively (Feldam, 2008).
To date, the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) is the canopy term for the AU mechanism for maintaining peace and security on the continent (AU Handbook 2014: 23) and since 2003, a total of 11 peacekeeping operations have been conducted by the African Union and they are laid out in the table below:
Table 2: AU Peace Missions 2003-‐2013 (Paul, 2011: 15)
Mission Location Duration Size Main Force Contributing State
Task
AMIB Burundi 2003-2004 3,250 South-Africa Peacebuilding
MIOC Comoros 2004 41 South-Africa Observation
AMIS Darfur 2004-2007 7,700 Nigeria, Rwanda,
South-Africa, Senegal and Ghana
Peace and civilian protection Special Task Force
Burundi
Burundi 2006-2009 750 South-Africa VIP protection
AMISEC Comoros 2006 1260 South-Africa Election monitoring
AMISOM Mogadishu2 2007 - present 22,126 Burundi, Uganda,
Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone
Regime support
MAES Comoros 2007-2008 350 South-Africa Election support
UNAMID (UN+AU) Darfur 2008-present 23,000 Ethiopia, Egypt, Rwanda and Nigeria
Peacebuilding and civilian protection REC-LRA Uganda 2011-present 3,500 CAR, DR Congo,
South-Sudan and Uganda
Elimination of Lord’s Resistance Army
AFISMAT Mali 2012-2013 7,469 Nigeria, Chad and Ivory Coast
Regime Support AFISM-CAR Central African
Republic
2013 - present 3,652 Congo, Cameroon, Chad, Gabon
Peacekeeping and civilian protection
2.7. Literature Review
2.7.1. Peacekeeping in Africa
The topic of peacekeeping in Africa has received much attention in the past few decades. However, research on this concept is mainly written in descriptive nature and is presented in official documents or reports. In other words, these studies are lacking critical analysis. The following will provide a background overview on literature on peacekeeping in Africa with a focus on the African Union.
Many deem that decolonization resulted in the proliferation of war in third world countries (Sadowski, 1998). Consequently, the international community responded by facilitating PKOs. Archer (2001: 111) stated that it is almost impossible to imagine today’s world without international organizations that compose significant contributions to maintaining peace and stability in the international political realm. According to Paul D. Williams (2013) in his book ‘‘War and Conflict in Africa’’, ‘‘the proliferation of peace operations was arguably the most visible international response to Africa’s wars’’. External actors have attempted to maintain peace in Africa in a myriad of ways and have not stood by idly. However, according to Addison and Murshed (2002), the enduring animosity with former colonialist has complicated the efficacy of the peacekeeping measures. Addison and Murshed (2002) contend that establishing peace agreements primarily depend on the legitimacy and credibility of the ones offering assistance.
This past decade can be characterized as a decade of African peacekeeping in which Africa is not merely the leading recipient of international interventions, but also one of the main troop contributors (Brosig, 2014). Diehl (1993) stated that the United Nations Operation in the Congo was a turning point to classical peacekeeping, as it was the first case in which regional African countries offered troops to create more credibility and legitimacy for the Congolese citizens.
Today, peacekeeping agencies are not only in search for political and economic components but also ethnic elements when initiating African PKOs. According to Brosig (2014), the number of deployed peacekeepers from neighboring countries is reaching great heights. However, these peacekeepers are often tasked with robust mandates, which could lead to the emergence of new challenges. For instance, Brosig (2014) stated that
