Transcription
S E P T E M B E R2 0 2 0PREPARED BYDr. Yvan Yenda IlungaDr. Olajumoke (Jumo) Ayandele Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Dr. Yvan Yenda Ilunga is a faculty member (Instructor) in the department of politicalscience at James Madison University, and holds a Ph.D. in Global Affairs from RutgersUniversity. His research agenda broadly focuses on international relations, security, peaceand development, but more specifically on questions related to humanitarian action, civil–military interactions, natural resources-based conflicts, peace operations, regionalcooperation and security, and economic and social sustainability. Dr Ilunga is a member ofthe Joint Civil-Military Interaction (JCMI) Research and Education Network, as well as amember of the Effectiveness of Peace Operations Network (EPON). He is the author of thebook Humanitarianism and Security: Trouble and Hope at the Heart of Africa (PalgraveMacmillan, 2020). He tweets at @DrYvanYenda.Dr. Olajumoke (Jumo) Ayandele is a Research Consultant at The Armed ConflictLocation & Event Data Project (ACLED) and a member of the United Nations CounterTerrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) Global Research Network. Herresearch interests broadly focus on understanding the dynamic relationship andintersection between African governance, human development, and political stability. Dr.Ayandele has won numerous awards and grants to conduct her research, with visitingresearch fellowships at the National Defence College, Abuja and the Center forInternational Studies (CERI) at Sciences Po. She holds a Ph.D. in Global Affairs, with aspecialization in Human Security from Rutgers University, an M.P.A. in InternationalDevelopment Policy and Management from New York University Wagner GraduateSchool of Public Service, and a B.A. in Economics (Hons.) with a minor in Political Sciencefrom New York University College of Arts and Science. She tweets at @Jumo Ayandele.Rutgers, The State University of New JerseyCenter for African Studies54 Joyce Kilmer AvenuePiscataway, NJ 08854-8045Phone: 848.445.6638Email: christine.waithe@rutgers.eduruafrica.rutgers.edu
Each year, the Center for African Studies at Rutgers Universitysponsors a variety of events on Rutgers’ campuses in collaborationwith multidisciplinary departments, centers, and programs. Theevents include conferences on the most pressing issues of our time,such as African Wars in the 21st Century. Held at Rutgers-Newark inFebruary 2020, this workshop fostered critical dialogue amongscholars and experts on the dialectics of the militarization of politicsand the push for democracy in Africa. Through conversations suchas these, we gain a deep understanding of the stakes of politicizedmilitaries for civil society and the possible avenues towardsstrengthening democratic institutions.The Center for African Studies is grateful for the support of theDivision of Global Affairs and the Peace and Conflict Studiesprogram at Rutgers University, the Center for Media and PeaceInitiatives, and the Joint Civil-Military Interaction (JCMI) Researchand Education Network for the production of this report. We alsothank Dr. David Rosen, Elizabeth Kissan, Madeline Vellturo, DanielForti and Daniella Montemarano for their expert views and richcontribution to the debate and conversation around the themes ofthe workshop. This report should be cited as:Ilunga, Y. Yvan, and Olajumoke Ayandele. “African Wars in the 21stCentury: The Militarization of Politics and The Politicization of theMilitary Workshop Report” (New Brunswick: Rutgers UniversityCenter for African Studies, 2020). Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Introduction and Regional Observation06About the Workshop08Opening Discussion09Workshop Sessions10Conclusion: Ways Forward19 Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report tobecharacterized by the use of force as a means to gain access to andmaintain power. Although the intent to develop and build strongdemocratic societies continues to be the political narrative of mostleaders and is the basis upon which many constitutions today arefounded, the practice of governance has shown very few cases ofsuccessful ruling without the use of force by political elites. Indeed,the years of political and military coups have long passed, with theAfrican Union no longer legitimizing such access to power. In the lasttwo decades, however, Africa has started to embark on a pathleading to the militarization of politics and the politicization of themilitary.This reality presents a very complex challenge. This is because themilitarization of politics and the politicization of the militaryorganically and systemically emerges from the manipulation of thepillars of democratic systems and their processes. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 07Political legitimacy is built upon the simultaneous use of certaindemocratic processes, such as elections and the progressive controlof state institutions, along with political power through the use offorce.1 Unfortunately, this way of occupying the political landscapeconstitutes a threat to long term peace, development, and securityin Africa.On February 28th, 2020, Rutgers University-Newark in New Jerseyheld a workshop titled “African Wars in the 21st Century:Understanding the Militarization of Politics and the Politicization ofthe Military in the Region”. Participants discussed the securitylandscape of Africa by focusing on issues of effectiveness alongwith performances of African armies in the context of themilitarization of politics and the politicization of the military in theLake Chad, Sahel, and the Great Lakes regions. The workshop wasco-sponsored by the Center for African Studies, Department ofPeace and Conflict Studies, and the Division of Global Affairs ion(JCMI)Research and Education Network, and the Center for Media andPeace Initiatives. This report will discuss the various presentationsfrom each workshop session, along with the findings and gaps in thecurrent study and practice of security assessment and analysis inthe above regions. The findings of this report will be beneficial ininforming the different roles that non-military actors can play inshaping security frameworks that promote stability in the region.1 Theauthors of this report define the use of force in this context as the engagementof a state’s security apparatus by state leaders, where security apparatus includes,but is not limited to, military, police, paramilitary, and private security forces. It canalso be viewed as the use of policies that promote coercive measures as a means tomaintain public order. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 08The workshop “African Wars in the 21st Century ” is part of a l-militaryinteractions in the context of fragility and peace recovery. Thus, theworkshop centered on bringing together scholars, policy analysts,and international organization representatives to discuss the currentlandscape surrounding African military studies, peace and security,and international relations. Workshop sessions were tailored aroundthe historical role of African militaries and their role in understandingthe evolving characteristics of African wars today, and in alsorethinking frameworks used to assess the effectiveness of peaceoperations and security sector reform efforts in the region. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 09The session was opened and introduced by Dr. Yvan Yenda Ilungawho discussed the background of the project and presented anoverview of issues pertaining to security and instability in Africa. Dr.Olajumoke (Jumo) Ayandele also led a group activity on securityassessment and mapping in Africa. Within this opening conversationand discussion, the following observations were made:oo The use and the pursuit of power in Africa has beencharacterized by the employment of coercive strategies bythose either in power or those aspiring to harness it. Thoseoutside the circle of power, if unable to follow the democraticprocess, have continued to rely on armed groups to fuel theirpolitical ambitions.oConsidering that most African nations are led and influenced byformer or current military leaders, it is important for scholars andpolicy practitioners to be aware of how this can affect domesticpolitical legitimacy and peace-building efforts in fragilecountries such as Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),and South overnance style. These wars are openly expressed by the rolethe military and has continued to play a critical role in thedemocratization of public spaces. Within local communities, theissue of governance is more related to the redistribution ofresources rather than the desire for political positioning.oEither seen from the lens of legitimacy or governance, thebottom line is that many African nations continue to emocraticprocesses like elections.oIt is impossible to discuss the performances of the military, thefuture of security and stability in Africa, and the strategies forstrong and sustainable communities without taking the abovefactors into consideration when discussing and examiningAfrican security and its correlation to international stability. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 10Workshop sessions were organized around several themes thatexamined governance processes as well as approaches to issues ofsecurity and peace from a theoretical and practical perspective.Session 1The first session began with a fundamental conversation as to whythe continent continues to experience military interference in politicsand subsequently highlights the various factors that continue tocontribute to military intervention. Participants observed that: Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 11II.Africa’s military groups are not apolitical. There are domesticactors and blocs that continue to influence military tunately,thecontinuous breach of the civil-military divide has led to themilitary as an institution losing its credibility and independence.With such an impact on the institution, the pending question thatspeaks to the future of the military in such a highly politicizedenvironment continues to be centered around the role of themilitary.IIII.Domestic actors: It is insufficient to think that domestic actorslike traditional and religious leaders can be ignored when itcomes to the restructuring of the security sector on thecontinent. They are critical actors who continue to holdideological, religious, and cultural powers that can either conflictor be compatible with reform efforts. Their influence andpresence should therefore be taken into consideration whenreforming Africa’s security sector.IIIIII. The militarization of politics in the region may be partiallyinfluenced by the growing practice of the securitization ofdevelopment and foreign aid. In this context, the increasingpresence of foreign military troops and the legitimization ofmilitarized humanitarian aid have encouraged political actors tomilitarize political and social spaces.The session also debated the issue of governance systems in democratic institutions are inherently African and on politicalrepresentation and accountability mechanisms within the context ofstate institutions and domestic legitimacy. Noting the abuse antshighlighted the need to research other governance models that arerepresentative and inclusive––all of which African states can adopt. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 12Session 2In the second session, participants discussed the need for thedevelopment of collaborative civil-military interactions within fragileand highly militarized communities in Africa. Panelists argued thatthis issue requires a complex security approach, considering theincreasing levels of political violence in regions such as the Sahelalong with the use of asymmetrical warfare structures by armedgroups that do not respect international humanitarian and humanrights laws. Participants argued that: Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 13I.IThis amalgam of security actors’ involvements in and outsidethe formal security spaces comes with an urgent need fordefense oversight. Doing so could progressively help promotean inclusive civilian controlled system that focuses on bothmilitary and political institutional accountability.II.IIThere is a need for coordinated regional leadership thatencourages strong civilian oversight in defense matters so thatstate leaders can budget and effectively oversee the strategy ofthe military. To cement this strategy, panelists suggested thatstate leaders consider accountability structures from local self-defensegroups alongwiththeintegrationofregionalstakeholders in supporting military efforts.The session also covered the issue of protecting civilians in Africa.The strategic use of violence against civilians was identified as oneof the contributing elements to more violence in the region andAfrica’s political instability. Participants asked critical questionscentered around issues such as who is a civilian and who is acombatant, what are the conditions under which civilians turn intocombatants, how “seasonal combatants” is defined, and hownonaffiliated civilians who pass intel to armed groups canreasonably be categorized.Among many of the challenges associated with protecting civiliansincludes a weak national security/territorial integrity from stateleaders. A result of poor integrity and a lack of political will fails toprotect civilians. Moreover, even in cases where there is political will,a lack of resources, limited training on civil-military interactions, andstate dependency on outside forces (regional or international)contribute to African states’ inability to ensure protection for theircivilians. As such it was agreed that: Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 14 When protecting civilians, policies and programs should begeared towards protecting with the community and not toa community. There is a need for systematic systems that assess militaryeffectiveness—particularly with respect to how to holdactors (military, civilian joint task forces) accountable, with theprocess public and transparent. Regional bodies and African states must come to a consensusabout the protection of civilians as well as definitions ofwhat constitutes a civilian. Civil-military interaction must rely on data driven strategies. Itis sometimesdifficulttomeasuresuccessincivil-military interactions, but advocacy efforts may be measured. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 15Session 3This session was based on a reflection of current peacekeepingoperations conducted in Africa. Considering that there are severalviews concerning the effectiveness of peacekeeping operations,participants in the spirit of the project discussed bilateral rmies.Participants agreed that the literature and practice of peacekeepingoperations continues to be influenced by the UN model eventhough operations on the continent should be informed by Africanarmies, considering that they know the terrain and culture better.However, engagement from African armies continues to be highlyinformed by countries’ political interests, which often constitutes anobstacle to the early deployment of troops as well as the fulfilmentof their missions. Participants additionally focused on the following: Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 16I.IQuestions concerning whether foreign troops deployed are intune with a region’s cultural nuances, along with the need forappropriate cultural training and awareness.I.IIWhy AU peace missions seem to be more geared counterinsurgency and terrorism operations, which may invokethe need for the redefinition of peacekeeping models in Africa.IIIIssues of perception: Peace operations cannot be assessedand comfortably written about if concerns related to citizens’perception are not addressed. One participant noted, forexample, that citizens view UN Peacekeeping missions as solelypeacekeepers and are not necessarily aware about missions’civilian functions and their roles in diplomacy. Here the questionwas ‘How does this perception influence the protection ofcivilians and political engagement?’IV The urgent need to empower African security forces with theIV.appropriate administrative, logistical, structural, and politicaltools for peacekeeping deployments and operations. Suchempowerment initiatives would limit the region’s dependenceon individual contributing troop countries in cases where theurgent deployment of forces is necessary to protect civiliansand prevent conflict. Additionally, peacekeepers would have asense of independence and agency in fulfilling their mandates.VV . The development of frameworks that measure citizens’ levelsof confidence and feelings of security in assessing theeffectiveness of peacekeeping operations. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 17Session 4The closing session reflects on global and regional efforts that haveaimed to restore long lasting peace by strengthening the continent’ssecurity sector and by promoting the integration of ex-combatantsin armies and civilian communities. Participants observed thatcurrent Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration (DDR)policies are politically driven processes, and that policies cized.Participants also agreed that the integration of ex-combatants intothe military may contribute to further political instability. Participantsquestioned if other alternative strategies exist to reintegrate excombatants in society without them posing a security risk orencountering social rejections. If so, who should be at the forefrontof this effort? Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 18Additionally, the session expanded on issues surrounding theprotection of child soldiers. Participants contended that it was criticalto define appropriate mechanisms and strategies the internationalcommunity could standardize when dealing with combatants whoare less than 18 years voluntarily surrendering. Additionally, certainparticipants argued that one man’s freedom fighter is another’sterrorist; this typology is critical in the context of internal asymmetricwarfare where certain government entities have been unable toguarantee the security and prosperity of their citizens because ofcitizens’ affiliations with armed groups. The session concluded ypractitioners:IThe need for more research on past armed groups, with afocus on their transformations and political integration.II.IIThe importance of transitional justice in DDR processes and theneed to acknowledge victims in any reintegration strategy.III Gendered DDR policies and processes geared towards women,III.an important factor albeit rarely taken into consideration.IV.IV The promotion and engagement of the private sector,especially with reintegration strategies for DDR processes.VV.The need for inclusive justice for children below 18. Rutgers Center for African Studies, 2020
Workshop Report 19The authors of this report want to collaborate with as many Africanscholars as possible, as well as those interested in this subject.Central to future
Dr. Yvan Yenda Ilunga is a faculty member (Instructor) in the department of political science at James Madison University, and holds a Ph.D. in Global Affairs from Rutgers University. His research agenda broadly focuses on
