Is external intervention in Africa successful in solving violent conflicts? Does it manage to address the structural causes of violence or does it exacerbate the problem? Are the “early warning” and “crisis prevention” approaches effective?
This article explores these questions and adopts a radical stance by challenging the main approaches in conflict prevention and resolution. Focusing on examples from South Africa and Zaire, the article criticises the pattern of Western intervention in Africa and suggests a thorough examination of the structural causes of internal conflicts.
The critical structural problems in Africa, or the “four horsemen of the apocalypse” are authoritarian rule, marginalisation of ethnic minorities, socio-economic deprivation combined with inequality, and the inability of states to manage normal political and social conflict effectively. As they are the primary causes of large-scale violence, they need to be at the centre of any external intervention plan and to be addressed properly for peace to be sustainable. In addition, a different interpretation of the terms ‘conflict’, ‘peace’ and ‘crisis’ are necessary to achieve better results in peacebuilding:
- Conflict is inevitable in any society, it derives from unequal positions of power of different groups and does not necessarily lead to violence.
- Intervention must therefore concentrate on how to manage conflict rather than on how to suppress it.
- Peace must be interpreted as the presence of political and social justice and not simply as the absence of violence, and as entailing radical change in situations of injustice rather than the preservation of order.
- Violence, usually the main concern from a humanitarian point of view, is a symptom of a structural crisis and not the crisis itself.
This different conceptual framework has a series of strategic implications. In addition to studying the specific history and context of each country, it is necessary to:
- Focus more on the structural causes of violence rather than on violence itself and distinguish between symptoms and causes of intra-state crises.
- Accept that the resolution of crises will take much longer than is assumed by the “early warning” model and that the crises do not end with the cessation of warfare.
- Plan peacebuilding strategies as the only way to prevent and resolve crises, foster efficiency and effectiveness on the part of state institutions and work towards structural accommodation of diversity.
- Make local actors responsible for peacemaking and peacebuilding, hold international actors accountable for their actions and avoid interventions that exacerbate violence and intensify inequality.
