Why and how has West Africa’s approach to security become less focused on the state and more focused on human security? This article explains the transformation in this sub-region’s security agenda and examines the evolving relationship between the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and civil society movements. It finds that civil society engages effectively with ECOWAS and has an active role in West Africa’s security decision-making processes. There are challenges ahead for this relationship, however, and civil society’s capacity for high-level advocacy needs to be enhanced. Clarity of vision within ECOWAS and a dynamic civil society are required to prevent external agencies from hijacking the sub-region’s security agenda.
The end of the Cold War ushered in a new conditionality for external support to West African countries based on principles of democratic governance. Removal of support for authoritarian regimes led to a collapse of governance and civil war in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea-Bissau, and Cote d’Ivoire. The intractable nature of the conflicts and their devastating regional impact forced ECOWAS to alter its position regarding peace and security. Non-engagement based on a view of security as ‘threat to the state’ evolved into a human security-based framework. In 1999, the Mechanism for Conflict prevention, Management, resolution, Peacekeeping and Security (‘the Mechanism’) was adopted. This emphasises early warning, peace-building and mediation as well as peace-keeping.
The same historical process pushed civil society to become active in the security debate over human security issues. A civil society movement in the field of peace and security is still evolving.
- A small but influential group of civil society actors has formed a loose network committed to peace. This has sustained debate and had a positive impact.
- There is mutual interdependence of local and global actors. The Office of the United Nations Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict and international NGOs have leant momentum to local advocacy.
- National governments tend to be stumbling blocks where civil society might reveal a regime’s governance shortcomings.
- There is a weak knowledge base on peace and security issues. Consequently, civil society is largely confined to low-level advocacy and there are few actors who can provide leadership and engage in high-level advocacy.
Civil society engagement with ECOWAS has become more focused and effective. ECOWAS has proved more open and accessible than national governments. Its leadership and key officials are committed and supportive. The Mechanism provides a normative security framework that enshrines engagement with non-state actors. The ECOWAS-civil society relationship is mutually beneficial, continues to evolve and has become institutionalised. However, there are challenges ahead for this relatively new relationship.
- Openness at the highest levels of ECOWAS may not always be present, particularly after the expiry of the term of office of the present leadership.
- There is potential friction as ECOWAS sees civil society as an ally and expects that both parties will agree on major political and security developments.
- Many of the civil society movement’s original leaders have moved into other roles. It is too soon to say whether new leaders will advance their cause.
- Western donors and agencies support ECOWAS, but remain uncoordinated and sometimes promote their own agendas. Clarity of vision within ECOWAS and a dynamic civil society are needed to prevent external agencies hijacking the sub-region’s security agenda.
