‘Silencing the guns should go beyond the slogan’
Prof. Eddy Maloka of the APRM says any future date set for silencing the guns should be realistic and achievable.
It has now been seven years since the African Union (AU) set the target of silencing the guns on our continent by 2020. We are already in the second month of this target year but there are no signs that conflict is about to retreat completely from our continent.
The question is not how we got here, because we know the causes of our conflicts, but rather, what are the lessons to learn? Why is it so difficult to silence the guns?
First, with the advantage of hindsight, the 2020 deadline was clearly ambitious, mainly because it was not evidence-based and scientifically determined. Rather, it was largely declaratory and political, made in the heat of the moment at the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the AU in 2013. The rationale remains correct to this day, though.
With the advantage of hindsight, the 2020 deadline was clearly ambitious, mainly because it was not evidence-based
As they put it in their Solemn Declaration on the 50th Anniversary of the OAU/AU, our leaders pledged ‘not to bequeath the burden of conflicts to the next generation of Africans, and undertake to end all wars in Africa by 2020’.
Therefore, moving forward, from 2020 and beyond, whatever future target we set for this noble goal should be informed by a scientific reading of the reality on the ground. It must be realistic and achievable, lest we demoralise ourselves and think we are failing when in fact the problem is in our methodology and long-term perspective.
Second, we are not giving adequate attention to the root causes of our conflicts. This was the intention in the Solemn Declaration, which stated, among the envisaged actions towards 2020, that we should ‘address the root causes of conflicts including economic and social disparities … [e]radicate recurrent and address emerging sources of conflict [and] push forward the agenda of conflict prevention’.
We are not giving adequate attention to the root causes of our conflicts
The efforts to silence the guns should go beyond the slogan, and boost considerably the capacity of African institutions to ‘pre-empt’ conflicts in a more comprehensive and timely manner, rather than as a ‘reactive’ conflict resolution approach.
Even though the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) is now operational, the conflict resolution focus of the AU is concentrated primarily on mediation and peacekeeping operations (PKOs/PSOs) and interventions.
Focus on conflict prevention
While the work of the PSOs can make significant impact on the ground, such as paving the way for elections or setting the groundwork for multi-dimensional PKO deployments, the reality, however, is that these missions are too costly and time consuming, and take too long to produce results.
In addition, the unpredictability of funding available for them threatens their existence, which is often shrouded in uncertainty. PKOs/PSOs do not necessarily ‘provide a lasting solution’ to the conflicts given the multiplicity and complexity of the issues and actors involved in the conflict, but rather serve to ‘de-escalate’ the conflict.
Recent years have seen conflicts within the continent arising from factors that relate to structural vulnerabilities, such as impacts of environmental issues; competition over the access, use and illegal extraction of natural resources; social unrest resulting from poor and unaccountable governance; prevalence of illicit small arms and light weapons; and religious radicalisation.
The scope of the union’s interventions should be broadened to also include structural conflict prevention that addresses the root causes of violence
Our current and customary peacemaking approach should, therefore, adapt and transcend the habitual data collection/analysis, mediation, and peacekeeping interventions. The scope of the union’s interventions should be broadened to also systematically include structural conflict prevention that addresses the long-term root causes of potential violent conflict (recognised in the 2015 AU’s Continental Structural Conflict Prevention Framework, the Voluntary Country Structural Vulnerability Assessments, and the related Country Structural Vulnerability Mitigation Strategies).
The decision of the AU to position the APRM as a tool for conflict prevention is a great opportunity to fill these gaps. The APRM’s 22 country review reports are known for having pointed systematically at the fragilities of member states with a great level of accuracy.
As more and more APRM member states undergo the country review process, we will generate an incomparable repository of data to expand the capacity of Africa to rely on home-grown knowledge that is critical to crafting African solutions to African problems more resolutely.
As more and more APRM member states undergo the country review process, we will generate an incomparable repository of data
A two-pronged approach
The APRM country evaluations have also demonstrated that successful structural prevention should take into consideration deeper societal conditions.
We need a two-pronged approach based, on the one hand, on prevention and early action, and, on the other, the customary route of mediation and peacemaking. This will substantially lower the costs of intervention. The 2016 AU Master Roadmap on Practical Steps to Take to Silence the Guns developed by our Peace and Security Council is anchored on this twin approach, but in action we are still predominantly one-dimensional.
Finally, our dependent model for eradicating conflict on our continent is clearly not sustainable. The operationalisation of the AU’s Peace Fund is an important achievement in this regard, but we need to do more to capitalise the fund from our own resources.
Our dependent model for eradicating conflict on our continent is clearly not sustainable
Peacemaking and peacekeeping do not come cheap. We have to up the game to foot the bill ourselves. We cannot muster and manage effectively the geopolitical interests of non-African actors involved in conflict on our continent if we are in the game empty-handed and on our knees, with a begging bowl.
If we want to determine the tune, we must be both the paymaster and the piper. If we want to continue to find African solutions to African problems, we must do more to find and deploy African resources.
If we want to determine the tune, we must be both the paymaster and the piper
Governance challenges
Governance remains a top priority for the AU. The AU Agenda 2063, through Aspiration 3, clearly provides for an ‘Africa of good governance, democracy, respect for human rights, justice and the rule of law’.
Governance is also one of the three main strategic priorities of South Africa as the incoming chair of the AU in 2020, along with economic integration, and women’s empowerment.
The APRM looks at governance in its multi-dimensional form around four thematic areas, namely democracy and political governance, economic governance, corporate governance and socio-economic development.
So as to realise this aspiration, the AU Assembly has mandated the APRM to develop a report on the state of governance in Africa, called the Africa Governance Report, in collaboration with the African Governance Architecture (AGA), and present it to the assembly every two years.
The inaugural report was presented and adopted by the assembly in February 2019. The main finding of the report is that we are doing better in areas of economic governance and socio-economic development but struggling in matters of democracy and political governance.
We are doing better in areas of economic governance and socio-economic development but struggling in matters of democracy and political governance
The focus for the next report on the state of governance in Africa in 2021 will be on possible African governance futures – where will our continent be in 2063, in the area of governance?
Among the possible governance drivers, we have:
- Governance of the democratic order
- Participation, inclusion and diversity management
- Silencing the guns
- State capacity and capability
- Leadership and innovation
We believe that the current and next generation of conflict on our continent is set to be governance-related. It is likely to involve disputes over political succession to a country's high office; succession disputes within political parties that spill over into society; the quantity, quality and outcome of elections; inclusion, participation and diversity management vis-à-vis access to the state and its resources; the term of office of incumbents; and peaceful transfer of power to an opponent after elections.
We believe that the current and next generation of conflict on our continent is set to be governance-related
A few countries will be undergoing elections in the course of 2020. We need to strengthen our capacity for prevention and early action in this area – beyond simply dispatching election observer missions.
We should analyse these forthcoming elections with the idea of prevention and early action in mind.
In short, through a relentless focus on conflict prevention, especially in governance-related areas, we can progressively address the challenge of silencing the guns.
This is an extract from a presentation given by Prof. Maloka at the ISS seminar on 4 February 2020 in Addis Ababa
Picture: APRM
