Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Antonia Witt
(Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF))
Sait Matty Jaw (Center for Research and Policy Development)
Send message to Convenors
- Discussant:
-
Gilbert Khadiagala
(University of the Witswatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa)
- Format:
- Panel
- Streams:
- Politics and International Relations (x) Violence and Conflict Resolution (y)
- Location:
- Philosophikum, S85
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 31 May, -
Time zone: Europe/Berlin
Short Abstract:
The aim of the panel is to demonstrate the relevance of local perceptions for understanding the effects and politics of African conflict management as well as their futures.
Long Abstract:
How people at the ‘receiving end’ of international interventions experience and evaluate the latter has received growing attention from scholars and peacebuilding practitioners alike. Yet in studying local perceptions of interventions, peace and conflict research scholars have predominantly focused on international/Western interventions, whereas evidence on local perceptions of non-Western interventions remains scarce. This gap is particularly puzzling in the case of African interventionism, that is, interventions conducted by African regional organizations such as the Africa Union (AU) or ECOWAS, whose growing role in international conflict management has been widely recognized. Addressing this lacuna, this panel seeks to bring together in-depth studies on the complex local perceptions of African peace interventions, of both military and non-military kind. One crucial aspect of such perceptions is what expectations and imaginaries of future regional conflict management individuals and communities in affected countries hold. How does the growing resentment against and rejection of Western interventionism feed into the imagination of future regional conflict management? The aim of the panel is to demonstrate the relevance of local perceptions for understanding the effects and politics of African conflict management as well as their futures.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 31 May, 2023, -Abdoul Karim SAIDOU (Université Thomas Sankara) Siriki BAGAYOKO (Université des Sciences Juridiques et Politiques Bamako)
Paper short abstract:
The article analyzes the determinants of the perceptions of Malian citizens vis-à-vis regional and international interventions. This contribution sheds new light on the state of knowledge on local perceptions of international interventions in Africa based on the case of Mali.
Paper long abstract:
This article analyzes the determinants of the perceptions of Malian citizens vis-à-vis regional and international interventions. These interventions have intensified since the coups of 2012 and 2020 and have raised tensions between Mali and its regional and international partners. The article aims to elucidate the evolution of local perceptions on these interventions and thus to fuel reflections on the prospects for peace and stability in Africa. It is based on an analysis of data from surveys carried out as part of the Mali-Mètre, semi-structured interviews and an analysis of recent literature on the security and political crisis in Mali. This contribution sheds new light on the state of knowledge on local perceptions of international interventions in Africa based on the case of Mali.
Sait Matty Jaw (Center for Research and Policy Development) Sophia Birchinger (Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF)) Omar M Bah (University of the Gambia) Antonia Witt (Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF))
Paper short abstract:
This contribution presents empirical findings on how AU and ECOWAS and their interventions are perceived locally. Based on a case study on The Gambia, we argue that the AU/ECOWAS interventions are highly contested but that this contestedness has a crucial spatial, temporal, and social dimension.
Paper long abstract:
International interventions by Western actors have been receiving outright criticism ‘on the ground’. While these interventions have been studied closely, we know little how, in contrast, African interventions are perceived locally. To fill this gap, this contribution presents empirical findings on the AU and ECOWAS interventions in The Gambia in 2016/2017, where former President Yahya Jammeh refused to hand over power after his electoral defeat. With both military and non-military interventions, the AU and ECOWAS supported a successful transition. But how have Gambians perceived these interventions? In answering this question, this paper draws on extensive collaborative field research in The Gambia in 2021/2022 in which we conducted 11 focus group discussions and 85 interviews in the capital and beyond. This contribution lays out the pertinent narratives about AU and ECOWAS and their interventions in The Gambia. In the case of The Gambia, perceptions have been multiple and complex, at times even contradicting. While the interventions are mostly evaluated positively as having sided with the people, others describe the two organizations as “oppressors”. We explain this complexity with both spatial, temporal, and social factors that affect how these African regional interventions are perceived (differently). With this, we show that analyzing interventions ‘from below’ allows seeing the concrete effects of AU and ECOWAS conflict management on the ground and their spatial and temporal conditionality.
Walt Kilroy (Dublin City University)
Paper short abstract:
What is the role of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in attempting to broker peace accords in South Sudan’s civil war? This regional eight-country body (of which South Sudan itself is a member) mediated some of the deals to end the fighting which broke out in December 2013.
Paper long abstract:
This paper looks at the role of the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) in attempting to broker peace accords in South Sudan’s civil war. Since serious fighting broke out there in December 2013, several regional mediators have in fact been seen. Some have even been parties to the conflict, or host nations for some of the two million refugees. They include IGAD, a regional eight-country body of which South Sudan itself is a member. IGAD mediated the High Level Revitalization Forum (HLRF), which attempted to bring the main parties together. Since the crisis worsened in 2016, the talks ran into difficulties and key players were excluded. The violence has led to a third of the population fleeing their homes, along with alarming levels of gender-based violence and food insecurity.
Sophia Birchinger (Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (PRIF))
Paper short abstract:
Based on a case study of AU and ECOWAS interventions in The Gambia, this paper discusses the coercive nature of these interventions, how people affected experience coercion at times of intervention and suggests a rethinking of coercion in conflict management and for regional order-making.
Paper long abstract:
Intervention research has for many years focused on UN peacekeeping missions or interventions run by ‘Western’ actors. However, for the past twenty years, it is African interventions that have gained ground in offering peace and security solutions on the continent. In contrast to ‘Western’ interventions, literature often describes them as less or even non-coercive and enjoying more legitimacy among those at the ‘receiving’ end. But what is coercion in the context of African conflict management? How coercive are African interventions? And, what constitutes coercion for whom and under what conditions? Drawing on ethnographic elements and interview and focus group research in The Gambia conducted in 2021/2022, this explorative case study sheds light on the lived-through experiences of Gambians at the time of AU and ECOWAS interventions between 2016 and 2022. In doing so, this paper (1) illustrates everyday perceptions of the coerciveness of AU and ECOWAS interventions in The Gambia and how those are complex and fall apart. It (2) demonstrates that coercion is much more ambiguous than its usual negative connotation and that the perceptions of it are shaped along parameters of time, space and positionality. From there, the paper (3) shows how perceptions of coercion reflect the attempt of regional order-making and impact its legitimacy. In conclusion, this paper suggests a re-thinking of coercion as a conflict management strategy for, in the long run, increasing the legitimacy of AU and ECOWAS ‘on the ground’.