GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Multi-Hazards
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Responsibility to Protect in Africa: An Analysis of the African Union’s Peace and Security Architecture

Responsibility to Protect in Africa: An Analysis of the African Union’s Peace and Security Architecture

Library
Kwesi Aning, Samuel Atuobi
2009

Summary

What is the best way to develop ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) norms in Africa? This article from the journal Global Responsibility to Protect argues that collaborative ventures between the African Union (AU) at the continental level, the regional economic communities (RECs) at the sub-regional level and the UN at the global level are the best options for deepening R2P norms. The AU’s attempt to solve the continent’s problems will continue to be thwarted by its lack of political will and the weakening of its norms and principles by some member states.

Since its birth in 2000, the AU has been taking steps to do things differently from its predecessor, the Organisation for African Union (OAU). It has established a set of norms and principles that mirror the tenets of the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (R2P) concept as agreed by the Outcome Document of the 2005 World Summit. These norms and principles coupled with the AU’s peace and security architecture make it proactive in conflict prevention and the management of crisis situations on the continent.

The world is experiencing a unique moment of opportunity in the relations between the UN and (sub) regional organisations broadly and the AU specifically.

  • The inclusion of Article 4(h) in the AU Constitutive Act gives the clearest indication that the organisation is prepared to protect the population of Africa against war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.
  • The AU security architecture is a further demonstration of the organisation’s commitment to create solid institutional backing to the Constitutive Act.
  • The Continental Early Warning Systems and the African Standby Force are among the institutions or organs that will enhance the AU’s capacity to prevent conflict and deal with humanitarian crises on its own, or with minimal support from the international community.
  • The AU sees collaboration with its subregional organisations (RECs) and the UN as vital for achieving its objectives.

While these developments are encouraging and offer opportunities, there are challenges. The AU’s responses to current security challenges in Darfur in Sudan, Somalia and Zimbabwe, and especially the ICC’s application for the issuance of arrest warrant for President Al Bashir of Sudan, does not reflect a clear commitment to the responsibility to protect.

  • There is a need to ensure more functional and effective cooperation and coordination with regional and sub-regional arrangements.
  • Such cooperation and collaboration must be premised on a clear division of labour that recognises the relative advantages of each organisation.
  • The fragile political situations in Somalia, Zimbabwe and Darfur in Sudan will continue to consume the AU’s efforts.
  • The AU’s seeming inability to deal firmly with these situations reveal the organisation’s lack of capacity to implement its commitments.
  • The AU’s responses to the crises in Zimbabwe, Somalia and Darfur show that the inclusion of R2P norms reflect more a sense of political necessity than a realistic assessment of its capacities to deliver on its responsibilities.
  • It remains to be seen how the AU will apply the responsibility to protect norm when its peace and security architecture has achieved full capacity.

Source

Aning, K. and Atuobi, S., 2009, 'Responsibility to Protect in Africa: An Analysis of the African Union's Peace and Security Architecture', Global Responsibility to Protect, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 90-113

Related Content

Serious and Organized Crime in Jordan
Helpdesk Report
2019
Humanitarian Access, Protection, and Diplomacy in Besieged Areas
Helpdesk Report
2019
Rule of Law Challenges in the Western Balkans
Helpdesk Report
2019
National Security Office responsibilities and functions
Helpdesk Report
2017

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".