Paper short abstract:

This paper examines the role of conflict narratives in the underutilization of Conflict Early Warning Mechanisms (CEWRMs) in Africa and the choice of conflict resolution tools for specific conflicts.

Paper long abstract:

This paper qualitatively compares peace and conflict assessments of major conflict and development datasets with the different ways conflict early warning mechanisms (CEWRMs) of the African Union and its RECs conceptualize conflict and structure their CEWRM offices. It finds that, more than these datasets' assessment of the 'empirical' peace and conflict situation in their region, the conceptualization of conflict and institutional design of CEWRMs are also a reflection of the political, normative, and practical considerations of the regional organization. Moreover, conflict narratives, formed from data gathered about the context, political dimensions, and practical considerations by specific actors with their unique positionalities and motivations, influence the decision to intervene and how and whether early warning findings translate into policy in the first place.

As an illustrative case study, the paper examines the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. It explains how the design of its Conflict Early Warning and Response Mechanism (CEWARN) measures indicators that are distant to the major conflicts in the region, particularly the brewing conflict in South Sudan in 2013. This paper then analyzes the differing and even conflicting narratives about the conflict that started the violent killings in South Sudan on 15 December 2013. It finds that different actors' positionality and interests motivated them to advocate for different interpretations of data on the conflict and the corresponding solutions. The paper further focuses on the role of the IGAD mediators and how their own positionalities influenced how they engaged with these varying conflict definitions in performing their mediator roles.

Paper short abstract:

Drawing on diverse sources, this paper addresses the intersections of politics, law and religion in contemporary Nigeria. It focuses on the controversy about the amended Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA 2020) to explore Nigeria's future in the light of engagement with politics of religion.

Paper long abstract:

This paper addresses the intersections of politics law and religion in contemporary Nigeria. It focuses on the controversy about the amended Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA 2020) which was passed into law by the Nigerian government in August 2020. The enactment of the new CAMA law generated a lot of controversies with mixed feelings from different quarters. While some applaud it as a step in the right direction, others oppose it and see certain provisions of the new law as a deliberate attack on faith-based organisations. Among the key actors in the opposition are leaders of the Christian community in Nigeria. Due to some historical antecedents and largely because of the dynamics of conflicts in the Nigerian context, where it has revolved around Muslims and Christians, in addition to the fact that the current state power is within the control of Muslims, Christian leaders view the new law as a declaration of war on Christianity. The paper draws on diverse sources, including newspaper articles, features, editorials and opinion published between August 2020 and December 2022; a wide range of other media locally produced in Nigeria such as television and radio; a series of extensive interviews with religious actors, civil society heads and legislatures; and secondary sources to explore the key arguments and concerns reflected in the CAMA 2020 controversy and what this tell us about Nigeria’s future in the light of engagement with politics of religion.

Paper short abstract:

The term 'Killer Herdsmen' is quite common when reporting the conflict between farmers and pastoralists or pastoralist groups in Nigeria. This paper explores the impact of framing/labelling on the increased clashes between herdsmen and sedentary farmers in Nigeria.

Paper long abstract:

In the last few years, 11 African countries have witnessed an increase in conflict between pastoralists and sedentary farmers and among different pastoralist groups. Factors such as climate change, desertification, religion, population expansion, trafficking, terrorism and more recently neo-pastoralism (a new form of armed ownership of cattle) have been highlighted as the reasons for the surge in violence. Although these factors are important in analysing the conflict, the framing of the conflict has made it difficult to understand the dynamics of the conflict and to find a lasting solution to these conflicts especially in countries like Nigeria. For instance, the term ‘killer herdsmen’ often used by some journalists and on social media often depict pastoralists as aggressors thereby resulting in retaliations.

This paper adopts a citizen science approach and a mixed method technique including key informant interviews (24 respondents) and surveys (213 respondents) to understand how the framing of the conflict has impacted on the dynamics. Findings reveal that there is a political motivation behind the framing of the conflict and this has further escalated attacks making conflict resolution more difficult.

To understand the dynamics of the conflict and the effect of framing/labelling in Nigeria, this paper asks the following questions: What factors are most significant in explaining the various forms of pastoral and farmers-herdsmen conflict in Nigeria? To what extent does Neo-patrimonialism explain the farmer-herdsmen conflict in Nigeria? How does labelling particular groups resonate with the groups and what impact does this have on conflict dynamics?

Paper short abstract:

I contrast changes in international narratives with continuities of national and local politics. Whereas the international approach towards the Central African Republic shifted from insurgency to crisis to geopolitics, the internal allocation of power and resources showed continuity.

Paper long abstract:

Over the past twenty years the international approach towards the Central African Republic has shifted dramatically. Depictions range from insurgency, rebellion, crisis, post-conflict to geopolitical playing field. Yet these are superficial narratives as underlying functioning of power and resource allocation in CAR shows remarkable continuity. Long-held political trends of neglecting the peripheries, pluralizing the means and use of violence internally and externally, and power circulating in a closed elite group centred in Bangui permeate the past 20 years of shifting international engagement. In 2003, Bozizé took power through a coup d’état supported by Chad and France. Ensuing violent contestations were framed as an insurgency legitimating French military intervention. Narratives shifted as Bozizé became more apparently autocratic and less amenable to France – successor armed movements in 2012 now enjoyed the label of rebels, legitimizing non-intervention. The new rebel government was brutally violent. The international narrative shifted to crisis, enabling the deployment of a massive peacekeeping mission, the installment of an unaccountable transitional government, and leading huge humanitarian engagement. Upon elections in 2016 the narrative shifted to post-conflict albeit no root causes having been addressed. The international engagement focused on restoring the state’s capacities in flagrant amnesia of the state security sectors’ pre-crisis abuses. When the new Government turned towards Russia as of 2018, the country was described as the playing field of geopolitical struggle, justifying the reduction of budget aid and diplomatic endeavors. In this paper I contrast changes in international narratives with the continuities of national and local politics.

Paper short abstract:

Participation in international peacekeeping operations has important consequences for domestic security of countries that sends troops and police officers. Yet, there is less scholarly attention on how peacekeeping experiences are incorporated into the fight against illegal mining in Ghana.

Paper long abstract:

Ghana may have successfully made a transition to multi-party politics and her role as a “peace-keeper” and “peace-maker” is well known. Yet internally, it is still struggling with a myriad of complex internal security challenges, especially the exploitation of gold by non-regulated small-scale miners (illegal mining), popularly known as galamsey, with grave social, economic, political, environmental and security consequences. Recent scholarship reveals that participation in United Nations (UN) peacekeeping has important consequences for domestic security of the countries that send troops and police officers such as Ghana. Considering the limited capacity and inability of local security actors to keep the peace and ensure security, the government has deployed a special taskforce codename Operation Vanguard, jointly comprising personnel of the Ghana Police Service (GPS) and the Ghana Armed Forces (GAF), what is often referred to as “internal peacekeeping” or “peacekeeping at home” to deal with the galamsey issue. While deficiencies such as human rights abuses and perceived failure of operation vanguard are acknowledged and debated in the Ghanaian media, there is less scholarly attention on the extent to which international peacekeeping experiences are incorporated into such domestic security operations designed to fight against galamsey in Ghana. This study seeks to fill this gap by focusing on operation vanguard and the galamsey menace.