Rethinking United Nations peacekeeping responses to resource wars and armed conflicts in Africa: integrating African indigenous knowledge systems

IF 0.7 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Evelyn B. Namakula
{"title":"Rethinking United Nations peacekeeping responses to resource wars and armed conflicts in Africa: integrating African indigenous knowledge systems","authors":"Evelyn B. Namakula","doi":"10.1108/jacpr-01-2022-0671","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nAs of November 2021, six out of the 12 United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations are in Sub-Saharan Africa, spread between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Western Sahara, Mali, Central African Republic, Abyei, South Sudan and Darfur. When considered alongside other recent conflicts in Liberia, Angola, Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire and Mozambique, many of these conflicts are driven and sustained by resource looting of oil, minerals, timber, gas and fertile land and sand. Although other factors, particularly colonialism, the creation of poorly governed states, ethnic polarization, greed and extremism contribute to violence, the author argues that resource looting is central. Taking the DRC as the case study, the purpose of this paper is to examine why traditional UN peacekeeping, grounded in the international liberal order, has failed to efficiently deescalate wars and armed conflicts that are driven by resource looting and how alternative homegrown peace strategies can be more effective.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nDeploying peacekeeping, peacebuilding and resource governance and theories, this paper examines the current UN peacekeeping efforts to increase our understanding of how alternative peacekeeping strategies found in African cultures, particularly indigenous epistemologies can be used to engender sustainable peace and security. The second argument is that sustainable peace and security cannot be solely exogenous, without integrating African cultural heritage, specifically African indigenous knowledge systems or epistemologies, a factor that is consistent with people’s right to self-determination and agency.\n\n\nFindings\nPeacekeeping that is exogenously enforced has failed to create sustainable peace and security in the DRC.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nTo the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper is original, based on the research conducted in the DRC. Following the academic writing norms, the data is backed up by literature.\n","PeriodicalId":45499,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jacpr-01-2022-0671","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose As of November 2021, six out of the 12 United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operations are in Sub-Saharan Africa, spread between the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Western Sahara, Mali, Central African Republic, Abyei, South Sudan and Darfur. When considered alongside other recent conflicts in Liberia, Angola, Sierra Leone, Côte d’Ivoire and Mozambique, many of these conflicts are driven and sustained by resource looting of oil, minerals, timber, gas and fertile land and sand. Although other factors, particularly colonialism, the creation of poorly governed states, ethnic polarization, greed and extremism contribute to violence, the author argues that resource looting is central. Taking the DRC as the case study, the purpose of this paper is to examine why traditional UN peacekeeping, grounded in the international liberal order, has failed to efficiently deescalate wars and armed conflicts that are driven by resource looting and how alternative homegrown peace strategies can be more effective. Design/methodology/approach Deploying peacekeeping, peacebuilding and resource governance and theories, this paper examines the current UN peacekeeping efforts to increase our understanding of how alternative peacekeeping strategies found in African cultures, particularly indigenous epistemologies can be used to engender sustainable peace and security. The second argument is that sustainable peace and security cannot be solely exogenous, without integrating African cultural heritage, specifically African indigenous knowledge systems or epistemologies, a factor that is consistent with people’s right to self-determination and agency. Findings Peacekeeping that is exogenously enforced has failed to create sustainable peace and security in the DRC. Originality/value To the best of the author’s knowledge, this paper is original, based on the research conducted in the DRC. Following the academic writing norms, the data is backed up by literature.
反思联合国对非洲资源战争和武装冲突的维和对策:整合非洲本土知识体系
截至2021年11月,联合国12项维和行动中有6项在撒哈拉以南非洲,分布在刚果民主共和国、西撒哈拉、马里、中非共和国、阿卜耶伊、南苏丹和达尔富尔。与最近发生在利比里亚、安哥拉、塞拉利昂、Côte科特迪瓦和莫桑比克的其他冲突相比,许多冲突都是由对石油、矿产、木材、天然气、肥沃土地和沙子的资源掠夺所驱动和持续的。尽管其他因素,特别是殖民主义、治理不善的国家的建立、种族两极分化、贪婪和极端主义都是暴力的原因,但作者认为,资源掠夺是核心因素。以刚果民主共和国为例,本文的目的是研究为什么传统的联合国维和行动,以国际自由秩序为基础,未能有效地降低由资源掠夺驱动的战争和武装冲突,以及如何替代本土和平战略可以更有效。设计/方法/方法运用维和、建设和平、资源治理和理论,本文考察了当前联合国维和努力,以加深我们对非洲文化中发现的替代维和战略,特别是土著认识论如何用于实现可持续和平与安全的理解。第二个论点是,如果不整合非洲文化遗产,特别是非洲土著知识体系或认识论,可持续和平与安全不可能仅仅是外生的,这是与人民自决和能动性权利相一致的一个因素。外部强制执行的维和行动未能在刚果民主共和国创造可持续的和平与安全。原创性/价值据作者所知,本文是原创的,基于在刚果民主共和国进行的研究。遵循学术写作规范,数据有文献支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信