There
is no single explanation or model for civil conflicts across the globe rather;
multiple competing and modified models exist. Civil wars have gained increasing
attention from academics and policymakers alike in recent years. This concern
is understandable since civil conflict is the source of immense human
suffering.It is estimated that civil wars have resulted in three times as many
deaths as wars between states since World War II. A major locus for civil wars in recent years has been
Sub-Saharan Africa, where twenty-nine of forty-three countries suffered from
civil conflict during the 1980s and 1990s. In the median Sub-Saharan African country, hundreds of
thousands of people were displaced from their homes as a consequence of civil
war during this period. There is a growing body of research that
highlights the association between economic conditions and civil conflict. Some
of the major economic roots of civil conflicts include unequal distribution of
resources, land disputes, poverty, corruption, greed and unemployment among a host of other causes.
Precarious
economic welfare ignites civil conflict; causing insecurity and growing
dissatisfaction among the people against existing governments. Political
instability and the risk of conflict increase. This encourages emigration of
highly skilled and educated labour and the flight of capital making it even more
difficult to reverse the process of economic decline. The vicious circle of poverty
and stagnation continues and with it the likelihood of conflict.
According Collier (2003) a civil war is classified as
an internal conflict with at least one thousand battle-related deaths. Fortna
(2008) cited that a civil war should represent a challenge to the sovereignty
of internationally recognized state, occur within recognize boundary of the
state, recognize the state as one of the principal combatants and lastly the
rebel were should be able to mount an organized military opposition were to
inflict significant casualties to the state.
The
risk of civil war will be particularly high if there is a sudden sharp fall in
output, employment and income, and no clear sign that the country will be able
to reverse it in the foreseeable future. The costs of economic stagnation have “a dramatic
causal impact on the likelihood of civil war.” Moreover, this is not confined
to low-income countries though they are, of course, particularly vulnerable
because “the impact of
growth shocks on conflict is not significantly different in richer more democratic
or more ethnically diverse countries”. For instance, sharp falls in
income and large increases
in unemployment preceded civil wars in Sierra Leone, Nigeria and Indonesia. The
same happened in Yugoslavia following the liberal reforms in 1989. The economy declined by 15-20
per cent and the rate of unemployment in some regions reached 40 per cent of
the adult population “fuelling social unrest.” The difference between
these four states was that in Yugoslavia income per capita was two or three times
the average for civil war countries and it had high levels of education as well
as a public health service that was unusually comprehensive for the country’s
level of industrialization. Two years later the first of the Yugoslav civil
wars broke out.
Impoverishment and inequality has
increased over the last thirty years worldwide to the extent that governments
have become either unable or unwilling to compensate for this through income
transfers thus causing civil war. The danger is that
nothing is done to reverse this situation; these trends will create exactly the
conditions in which people, especially inhabitants of the poorest countries,
can easily become caught in the vicious circle of relative or absolute
impoverishment, despair and hate. The
low level of development limits the capacity of a country to produce the volume
of output required to satisfy the needs and aspirations of its
population.Consequently, employment opportunities are also limited so that
unemployment is invariably high and it increases the inequality.
Corruption
plays an important role in igniting civil wars. Corrupt governments are usually
incapable of delivering public services to the people. Closely linked to
corruption are nepotism, ethnicism and tribalism resulting into unequal
participation in the socio-economic and political space of a country. These
factors can be perfect ingredients to ignite civil wars. According to the
Sierra Leone Human Rights Commission(2008), bad governance, endemic corruption
and the denial of human rights together with their attendant consequences made
the Sierra Leone civil conflict inevitable‖. According to a Monograph article (2001) Kabila failed
to reverse corruption, mismanagement and self-enrichment that had characterised
Mobutu’s government hence this led to the DRC conflict of 1997. Campell (1999)
cited that Congolese Democratic Movement (CDM) Kabila’s mass killings,
arbitrary violence, tribalism, nepotism and corruption. Recently Mubarak and
Morsi were removed by coups in Egypt because of a corrupt system that failed to
provide ‘Bread, Freedom and Social equality’ as
symbolised in the slogans that were chanted at Tahir Square (Brown 2013).
According Mwanika (2010) natural resources can also be
connected to the acquisition, use, and proliferation of small arms and light
weapons, a situation that has exploited the negative opportunities provided by
globalisation. In this case, natural resources have provided a parallel
political economy for fuelling wars and conflicts. Mineral
Resources such as diamonds has been known to have sustained wars in various
African countries like Sierra Leone and Angola. Rebels or the governments have
been accused to plunder minerals to fund civil wars through exchanging the
precious minerals for military weapons. Roberts (2003) noted that United
Nation's Fowler Report cited that The United Nations estimated Angolans
made between three and four billion dollars through the diamond trade between
1992 and 1998 despite sanctions and trade restriction and diamond firms
like De Beers have openly acknowledges
spending $500 million on legal and illegal Angolan diamonds in 1992 alone while
people like Joe De Deker, a former stockholder in De Beers, worked with the
government of Zaire
to supply military equipment to UNITA from 1993 to 1997. The Diplomatic handbook
(2007) cited that it will be simplistic to attribute the Sierra civil war of March 1991 to January
2002 to diamonds however diamonds played an important role in funding the war
as well as creating allies like Muammar Gaddafi who had interests in diamonds
who supplied weapons and training bases. Similarly Horovitz (2009) observed By
late 1992, the Revolutionary United Front RUF (the rebels fighting against the All
People‘s Congress (APC) occupied diamond-rich areas and began sending gems to
their foreign patrons, in exchange for weapons and logistical support. Gudza
(2007) observed that countries like Zimbabwe were motivated by diamonds to
enter the Democratic Republic of Congo war on the side of Laurent Kabila an
illegitimate leader. In Somalia Al Shaabab finance its war through selling
ivory and it has been accused of killing more than ten thousand elephants each
year. wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shaabad (militia-group)
Some scholars like Collier subscribe to the greed and
grievance discourse. This theory highlight that civil wars can be caused pure
greed while grievances are used to a facade. According Collier (2006) argues
that the financial vibility of rebel organization is a determinant factor in
civil wars. He argues that factors inequality, a lack of democracy, and ethnic
and religious divisions, had little systematic effect on causing conflicts. His
argument uses groups that led Civil conflicts in Colombia like FARC which was
able to employ 12,000 people through kidnapping and drugs. In contrast the
Michigan Militia in USA failed to make an impact because it had no money to
finance the war. The motivation of groups like FARC is greed than grievances. The rebels usually target primary commodity
exports, examples can be drawn from secceions thus the Katangan secession
movement in Zaire targeted the
copper mining region; the Biafran secession movement
targeted Nigerian oil producing region ; the Aceh secession movement in
Indonesia took the oil-producing region with per capita GDP three times the
national average; the successful Eritrean secession was a region with double
the per capita income of the rest of Ethiopia (Collier 2003).
Possible
ways of mitigating these stems from using an effective criterion for
anticipating the likelihood of civil war is to consider whether the country has
already suffered from a civil conflict. Indeed, half of the civil wars since
World War II, and every civil war that began after 2003 have taken place in
countries that had a previous civil war (Collier and Hoeffler, 2007; World
Development Report, 2011). The recent report from the World Bank argues that
international assistance focuses on recovery rather than prevention (World
Development Report, 2011). The predominance of civil wars during the 80s and
the 90s in the South
has led international support to be targeted to ending civil conflicts. The aid
received in post-conflict countries greatly exceeds the aid received in fragile
states to prevent an escalation of violence. An illustration is West Africa
during the 2000s. The World Bank reports that the aid to two post-conflict
countries, Liberia in 2008 and Sierra Leone over the 2000-2003 period, was
around US$415 per capita and US$186 per capita (each year) respectively. By
contrast, aid for preventing conflict in Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, and Togo was
only US$42 per capita. However, understanding the precise causes of civil war
may help to apply adequate instruments to prevent them. There are some
inexpensive interventions, such as state-society consultations even if
financial assistance is often necessary to stop the rising of violence (World
Development Report, 2011).
Economic Development
The
main empirical result of the literature suggests that the best long-run
conflict prevention strategy is economic development. A direct instrument for
development is giving aid to poor countries. Aid has some positive effects in
conflict prevention, in addition to the desired reduction of poverty. Collier
and Hoeffler (2002) argue that aid has no systematic direct effect on the risk
of conflict, but that it is beneficial nonetheless through its effect on
growth. However, Collier et al. (2004)
show that the gain is modest relative to the cost of the aid and they argue in
consequence that conflict reduction should not be the core rationale for aid to
low-income countries. An essential factor of long-run development is the
quality of institutions (Acemoglu et al. 2001). The World Bank report argues
that institutions for security, justice and jobs should first be consolidated
to prevent repeated cycles of violence. To have any chance of success,
post-conflict strategies must, therefore, concentrate from the start on
institutional changes and policies that promote reconciliation, reconstruction
and reduction in absolute poverty and income insecurity.
Reconciliation
The
effort to achieve reconciliation of the warring factions is therefore of
critical importance, and its success will depend on how the authorities deal
with four major problems, each
of them more serious after the conflict than before. First, as all internal
conflicts result in atrocities against civilian populations as well as the combatants,
the old grievances, resentments and animosities are likely to be felt even more
intensely. The war may also change the ethnic balance of the population in a
region or country, as large numbers of people are forced to flee their homes.
The minority will now feel even more insecure than before, a fact that the
majority may exploit in order to ‘cleanse’ the ethnic or religious character of
their region or country by making the minority’s life intolerable and forcing
it to emigrate. Anticipating this, a Government genuinely determined to promote
reconciliation will act promptly after the conflict to outlaw discrimination
and threats against any group and will use – and be seen to use – the
law enforcing agencies to implement the new laws. This is essential to
demonstrate the determination of the authorities to break with the past by giving
all those living on their territory a stake in the new order.
Reconstruction
“The reconstruction of physical
infrastructure and the provision of social services are critical for the revival
of economic activity and giving people a stake in the peace process”.ll
Although
the scale of destruction inflicted by civil wars will vary from country to
country, the effect can be devastating even in conflicts of relatively short
duration. In addition to the costs (human, social and economic) mentioned
earlier, shortage of food is a common problem. As a result, nutritional
standards, which are inadequate in low-income countries even at the best of times,
can fall to dangerously low levels. With many residential buildings badly
damaged or destroyed, serious shortage of housing is another common problem.
Much of the infrastructure and productive assets in agriculture and industry
will also be destroyed, damaged or made obsolete during the conflict. The
combined human and economic cost of the devastation can be staggering. For example, as a result of the
genocide in 1994, GDP per capita in Rwanda is 25-30 per cent lower than it
would have been without the conflict. During the conflict, 10 per cent
of the population died and almost four times as many people fled to
neighbouring countries. As a result of such heavy casualties, children have
been left with the responsibility of looking after 85,000 of the country’s
households. The level of poverty increased significantly, with 60 per cent of
the population regarded in 2001 as poor and 42 per cent unable to meet basic
food needs.Food, shelter, clothing and medical services must, therefore, be
given priority in postconflict countries in order to provide people with the
basic needs necessary for survival.
Create
employment
The
first goal is to achieve high levels of employment and job security in order to
give
everyone
a stake in their country’s future so that people do not feel useless, not
wanted or live in fear of the future. This was judged in the 1940s to be so
important that it was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The second goal aims at
sustaining the rate of growth required to maintain high levels of employment
and job security in the long run. The third goal is to keep prices stable so
that the rate of inflation does not make it impossible to achieve the other objectives.
The fourth goal is to ensure that the gains from economic progress are
distributed in a way that is widely regarded as fair and, also, makes sure that
nobody is allowed to exist below a socially acceptable standard of living. The
fifth goal is a sustainable external balance (on the current and long-term
capital accounts) to enable the country to preserve its economic sovereignty,
thus allowing it to pursue the other four goals thereby mitigating civil war.
Fighting Corruption
Self
aggrandisement and greed erodes the moral fibre of nations and it destroys the
economies of the nations. It creates inequality and intolerable poverty that
causes the discontent to take arms against governments. To ensure peace
governments needs to adopt systems that promote accountability and
transparency. Highly punitive legislation needs to be adopted to punish
offenders this will deter potential offenders.
Promotion of democracy
will create equitable economic growth that will attract foreign direct
investments that will lead to employment and improve livelihoods. Democracy and
inclusive political systems needs to be embraced. According Tobbala (2013)
democratic governance is known as a combination of both the values of democracy
through a process of governance that involves interaction among actors
representing the State, civil society and the private sector. The process of governance
is therefore based on universally accepted principles ensuring the balance of
power, checks and balances. The principles mainly include: participation,
accountability, and transparency, rule of law, separation of powers, access to
justice, subsidiarity, equality and freedom of the press. These principles are
needed to ensure that democratic governance takes root. Militarism and
repressive laws needs to be curtailed. Civil societies should work hand in
glove with governments to help in coming up with democratic systems that
ensures that citizens has full and active participation in the government.
International
and Regional bodies like UN and AU should promote and enforce good governance
among member states to ensure that there is no abuse of power. The bodies can
then take to task leaders who are defiant to its dictates. Bad governance in
most cases results in inequalities when sharing resources.
References
Roberts, Janine (2003). Glitter & Greed: The Secret World of the
Diamond Empire. , New York ,The Disinformation Company Ltd pp.223–224
Horovitz, S. (2009) ‘Sierra Leone: interaction between
international and national responses to the mass atrocities’ in Domac, vol 3, December.
The
Human Rights Commission of Sierra Leone, ‗First Annual Report on the State of
Human Rights in Sierra Leone 2007‘ (March 2008)
Campbell H. (1999),
“Democratisation, Citizenship and
peace in Congo”, in M. Baregu, Crisis in the
Democratic Republic of Congo, Harare, Sapes books,
Tobbala,
S. (2012). Local Governance and
Democratization: The Roadmap for a Responsive Accountable Egypt, Cairo University, Faculty of Economics and
Political Science – FEPS.
Gudza, T. (2007). Zimbabwe’s print media coverage of the country’s
military involvement in the Democratic Republic of Congo from 1998-2002: The
case of The Herald, The Sunday Mail, The Financial Gazette and The Zimbabwe
Independent, Honours
Dissertation, University of Zimbabwe, 2007.
Fortna.
V, (2008), Peacekeeping and the peacekept: Data on peacekeeping in civil
wars 1989-2004 ,New York, Columbia University.
www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Shaabad
(militia-group) accessed 14/4/2014
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.