Conflict and conflict resolution in Africa

The collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989, arguably, signaled not only the shifting of a considered restrictive socio-political landscape for the people of the Soviet Union, but also as a monumental beginning of a new world that gravitated toward those institutions that promoted “democratic, consensual, free-market-oriented governance.” This new world equally seemed propelled away from institutions that practiced authoritarian rule and promoted centrally-planned economies. Thomas Friedman in his book The World is Flat states that the “Berlin Wall was not only blocking our way; it was blocking our sight—our ability to think about the world as a single market, a single ecosystem, and a single community.” A world that sees itself as a single community is expected to enforce mechanisms that insure its security or at least ways of avoiding conflicts. Should these conflicts arise, this community must have a way of resolving them. It should be a community aware of the benefit and the devastation of the forces that maintain it unity and those that may pull and tear it apart, centripetal and centrifugal forces. A casual look at what has punctuated this single community shows some repugnant developments. What has been happening in Cambodia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Somali, Sudan, just to mention a few countries, is a reversal of what one would expect in a single community. But not to expect conflict in single community may be rather naïve. It has been argued that human beings are imperfect individuals. They, therefore make up imperfect communities within this single community. Interaction of these communities is imperfect and this causes conflict. Nowhere is this phenomenon widely witnessed and overwhelming than in the African continent.

According to an experiment from the proceedings of the Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), a West African multilateral armed force established by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), there is an emerging pattern of conflict that is rooted in a number of factors:

a. Tensions between sub-national groups stemming from the collapse of old patterns of relationships that provided the framework for collaboration among the many ethnic groups in most states

b. Disputes over resources sharing arising from gross disparities in wealth among different groups within the same countries and the consequent struggles for reform of economic systems to ensure an equitable distribution of economic power

c. Absence of democratic structures, culture and practice, and the consequent struggle for democratization, good governance and reform of political systems

d. Systemic failures in the administration of justice and the inability of states to guarantee the security of the population

e. Issues relating to religious cleavages and religious fundamentalism.

Despite increased tragic incidences of conflict in Africa, some of them so horrendous that they leave hundred of thousands people dead (e.g. the Rwandese genocide) and millions internally displaced or condemned to refugee camps (e.g. the ongoing Darfur crisis), there are increased efforts devoted to not only preventing, but also to resolving conflicts. There has been an increase in the number of regional, sub-regional organizations devoted to conflict prevention and resolution. Some of them are merely ad hoc coalitions that perform significant, in spite unrecognized, roles in resolving conflicts. According to the United High Commission for Refugees, post-Cold African conflicts have evoked international concern because of their disturbing consequences on non-combatants, with women and children being the mostly affected. There are two different ways in which international NGOs are perceived. On the one hand, they have been accused of partnering with “imperialists” in reinforcing dependency syndrome among nations in conflict on foreign aid. This dependence, it is argued, undermines sovereignty of affected nations. These international NGOs are also accused of lacking in accountability and for their long-term economic crippling effects that result from poorly managed pumping of foreign currency into local economies. There is, of course, another line of thought that discounts these allegations by elucidating on the impact of international NGOs in reconstructing disintegrated nations.

It is worthy examining the state of conflict and conflict resolution in the twenty first century Africa since the last century ended with an appreciation of the significant role the regional and sub-regional organizations played. Unlike international NGOs, regional organizations are better placed to extrapolate conflict in Africa, which is a complexity of numerous functions: identity, culture, heritage, and clash over control of resources that brew tension, antagonism and escalation of skirmishes. Unfortunately, most of these conflicts are “prosecuted by armed groups that ignore international conventions of governing the conduct of conflict.”

As the 21^st Century unfolds, regional and sub-regional organizations will more likely be strengthened. This will call for more responsibilities on their part. However, their major challenge will be in two folds: ability to resources to strengthen requisite structures, and the ability of these structures to measure up to the challenges. Most organizations were not initially formed for conflict resolution purposes. According to UNHCR, most of these organizations were economic organizations that did not have security of conflict resolution mechanisms. They only stepped up “partly due to the failure of African countries to support the organizations in conflict management.”

The future of conflict resolution in Africa calls for involved organizations to be “task-specific.” This will not only allow for evaluation but it will ensure that synchronization of activities and avoidance of task duplication. To have a better understanding of the conflict and how to resolve it, organizations will need to more than ever before involve the civil society. Such collaboration will enhance societal regeneration and an attempt to achieving positive peace, which is the foundation of reconciliation and coexistence.

It will be also necessary for organizations involved in conflict resolution to consider in a different and new light the role that African culture would play in resolving conflicts. One challenge would be for these organizations to “re-educate” or “introduce “cultural logic” that is consistent with sharing and accommodation. Concepts such as ubuntu that expresses the profundity of what it means to be “human,” and that “humans are humans because of other humans,” may need to be re-emphasized.

While resolving conflicts is itself a huge and challenging task given the restrictive circumstances most organizations and countries are operating from, avoiding future conflicts is yet another that challenge, though surmountable. One way to achieve and sustain peace would be appreciation of good governance and revamped economies that would more likely lead to harmonious intra and inter-group harmony.