Globalisation and Violence: Implications for peace and security in the Great Lakes Region of Africa
Dr. Elijah Dickens Mushemeza
Mushemeza@ss.mak.ac.ug
Department of Political Science and
Public Administration
Makerere University
PO.Box 7062, Kampala
Tel. 256-41-531499/077 595868
Fax: 256-41-534181
Email:A Paper presented to the 10th CODESRIA General Assembly 8-12 December 2002, Kampala, Uganda.
Paper Abstract
Contemporary African situation has shown evidence of new forms of violence. The end of the cold war and the Apartheid regime in South Africa have led to the proliferation of weapons particularly light arms into the various regions of Africa. These weapons have been used either in the name of liberation, ethnic cleansing, counter insurgency or as a means to regain lost political power or acquiring wealth. The Great Lakes region of Africa is not an exception to such new forms of violence. This is a region that is grappling with the question of democratic transition and yet its peace and security is threatened by these new forms of violence. The paper analyses the relationship between global forces and the agents of violence vis-à-vis peace and security in the region. The paper proposes that to transform the culture of violence to a culture of peace and security we need to re-think the state and promote a policy of demilitarisation of our societies.
Introduction: Conceptual Issues
The Great Lakes region of Africa is generally considered to include the following countries: Burundi, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. It is a region that is characterised by widespread violations of human rights. Such violations are the underlying causes of violence, instability and chaos. In this context human rights are taken in a broad perspective that encompasses, the political, civil, social, economic and cultural rights.
Experiences of violence are not new in the Great Lakes region of Africa. Kingdoms rose and fell through violence and war. However, recent times have shown the emergence of new forms of violence and there is a thinking that globalisation has contributed to the new phenomenon of violence.
But, what is violence, globalisation and security?
Garver (1968) suggests that violence is a violation of a person. Persons can be violated either with respect to their bodies (physical violence) or with respect to their ability to make their own decisions (psychological). To him violence is considered as the disempowerment of persons. Similarly, Galtung (1988) conceptualises violence as anything avoidable that impedes human self realisation. Human self realisation is in turn conceived of as the satisfaction of human needs of which Galtung suggests a tentative list, including a large range of needs of physiological, ecological, social and psychological/spiritual kinds.
Galtung identifies four types of violence in the world today: first, classical violence, that is, deliberately inflicted harm, including not only war, but also torture, ‘inhuman or degrading’ punishment, subjection to mortal dangers and, at the wholly domestic level, crime; secondly, `misery’, seen as the deprivation of basic material needs; thirdly, ‘repression’, being loss of freedoms of various kinds, particularly freedom of choice; and fourthly, ‘alienation’, the deprivation of non material needs for relations with society, others and oneself, resulting in loss of identity.
Galtung further makes a distinction between direct violence - the first type - and structural violence identified with the rest types. Whereas direct violence is caused by the harmful actions of identifiable individuals against others, structural violence results from features built into the structure of a society, with no identifiable actor at whom to point blame. But he argues that structural violence is avoidable in the sense that society could be structured differently so as to avoid these negative happenings. The same views are shared by Kim, S (1984:181).
On the other hand, violence may be taken to be positive depending on the context. One of the justifications of Fanon’s social theory and practice of violence is that colonial, social and economic structures established by and sustained through violence had to be replaced by a new structure by use of force and violence (Fanon, 1963). Be as it may, whether violence is used in revolutionary struggles as suggested by Fanon, it destroys life, property, culture and generally peace and security of a society.
The concept security has been a subject of debate. The debate in the literature has challenged, one of the central assumptions of Realist Perspective that holds protection of the state, its borders, resources, population etc. as the essence of security. Security was provided primarily through military force, backed by a robust economy and stable political leadership. During the cold war, the linkage between military activity and security became so strong that an issue that did not involve military force was simply not a security issue (Baldwin, 1997).
With the end of the cold war, the state centric notion of security was challenged by a number of scholars and the Defence Review programmes that are going on in Africa. Among the scholars and other publications include (Buzan et al. 1998; Matthew 1989; Booth 1991; Baldwin 1997; Grahm and Poku 2000; South African White Paper on Defence, 1996). As a result of challenging military dominated, state-centric concepts of security, a broad understanding has been the emergence of new concepts that is, society security (Waever, 1995); human security (Booth, 1991; UNDP, 1999); and international security (The UN Charter).
For this paper security is understood as an all-encompassing condition in which individuals live in freedom, peace and safety; participate fully in the process of governance; enjoy the protection of fundamental rights; have access to resources and the basic necessities of life; and inhabit an environment which is not detrimental to their health and well being.
Violence as conceptualised by Galtung that is, direct and structural undermines security. And globalisation process to some people is violence itself or predominantly facilitates violence. But what is globalisation? And who controls this globalisation process?
Globalisation as a concept becomes distinctive when it is used to designate ‘a trend whereby social relations become less tied to territorial geography. Global phenomenon are supra territorial: they can extend across widely dispersed locations simultaneously and can move between points anywhere on earth pretty much instantaneously. (Scholte, 1998).
Globalisation as a contemporary process in creating a ‘new world order’ might be regarded as both positive and negative. Viewed from a neo-liberalism perspective, globalisation is a triumph of political liberalism and of the unfettered play of market forces and as likely to strengthen the economic and social basis for the unity of mankind by offering fresh possibilities for ‘new partnerships’ in the world order (Jinadu, 1999).
On the other hand, from the Marxist perspective, contemporary globalisation depicts the dominant neo-liberal paradigm, a new form of imperialism in which global financial and corporate institutions dominate the global economic and political space. The advocates of such globalisation are ‘more concerned with the security of financial institutions and corporate interests than human security’ (Salim, 2000).
Similarly, other critics of globalisation argue that it has imposed a violent, post-colonial imperialism; deepened social hierarchies (e.g. class, gender etc.); extinguished vulnerable cultures; undermined every fabric of community; massively aggravated ecological degradation; and compromised every claim to knowledge, scientific or otherwise (Axford, 1995; Osuji, 1997; Thomas and Wilkin, 1999).
Africa as the whole and the Great Lakes region in particular has not escaped the imposition of neo-liberal globalisation, which Salim (1999) argues that, it has weakened the state’s resolve and capacity to intervene in the maintenance of peace and order. The emergence of warlords in Somalia, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Uganda, DRC and among other African states is testimony to debilitation of the African state as a provider of physical security and the emergence of private security arrangements. Similarly, advancement in information technology and communication has also facilitated the warlords in their quest for arms and ammunitions in their project of self enrichment. On the whole globalisation is process that is complicated. It cannot be stopped or reversed, but is can be manageable if appropriate responses are organised by those who are the likely losers in such process.
The Nature and Characteristics of the states in the Great Lakes region.
Strategic Environment Scenarios (SES).
SES
P-
Politics & Governance
R-
Regional/
Resource
I-
InternationalS-
Social Cohesion
E-
Economic
M-
Military
A
Prosperous and Stable states in GLR
P1
Political stability
R1
Existence within a stabilizing region
I1
Constructively engaged
S1
General Improvement
E1
Steadily increasing, broad and sustainable economic improvement
M1
Constitutional, peaceful and stable
B
States strive to consolidate
P2
Relative political stability
R2
Existence within a turbulent region
I2
Increasingly engaged
S2
Fluid, improving in many areas declining in some
E2
Gradual economic improvement
M2
Professionalising military with gradually improving civil-military relations
C
States in disarray
P3
Political chaos
R3
Regional failure leading to competition over poor resources
I3
Relative isolation
S3
Disintegration and Chaos
E3
Economic collapse
M3
Disintegration and warlordism.
Table 1 above identifies six key drives that guide the nature and analysis of the states in the Great Lakes region namely: P-Politics and governance; I-International partnerships and obligations; R-Regional cooperation and resource constraints; S-Social cohesion and human development; E-Economic production and globalisation; M-Military – civil relations.
The states in the Great Lakes region that is Burundi, DRC, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda are oscillating between SES B and SES C or between P2, R2, I2, S2, M2 and P3, R3, I3, S3, E3, M3
Globalisation and violence are likely to push all the states in the GLR to SES C if appropriate security and peace measures are not adhered to. Here, I have in mind the Lusaka Peace Accord.
But what are the factors that have led to the emergence of the new forms of violence in the Great Lakes region? To answer this question, we need to focus both at domestic and global environments.
Domestic Context
The wars of liberation in Southern Africa initiated a culture of revolutionary violence as a process to destroy the colonial state and build a new state based on African interests. Quite a number of people ideologically became committed to the use of violence to change a social and political order that is not agreeable to them.
The Great Lakes region has also witnessed civil wars particularly in Burundi, Rwanda, DRC and Uganda, with one group challenging the other to control the state. The wars have attracted a series of armed interventions in the name of restoring regional stability, preventing genocide, state security and so on. These interventions have created or facilitated the militarisation of the region through training and arming war lords.
In some states like Uganda and Burundi the coups de’tat led to the breakdown of military armories where weapons found their way to the land of communities. The acquiring of firearms by the Karamajong in Uganda dates back to 1979 war and the subsequent coups d’etat. Cattle rustling which was traditionally carried out by use of spears and Machets is now done by use of AK-47 rifle. The coups in Burundi have also had a similar effect of proliferation of weapons to the communities that have felt the sense of self defence and preservation. Some warlords are not interested in peace, the more they stay in the jungles, the richer they become through exploitation of minerals, timber and drug trafficking. These war lords have links with multinational companies with vast experience in business looting and plunder.
Therefore, the post-colonial militarisation in Africa and the Great Lakes region in particular partly explains the opening wage for the emergence of new forms of violence.
The Global Context
The end of cold war seem to have affected and perhaps led to the breakdown of the system of arms supply in the international system. Small and light weapons are easily sold on the black market. Even large military equipments like MIG-24 fighter aircraft from the former Soviet Republics have found their way to Uganda and Rwanda.
Similarly, countries like South Africa which originally were isolated are now supplying large quantities of arms and ammunitions to the Great Lakes region. It is normal to find war lords in DRC with anti-aircraft guns, artillery support weapons like the Mamba, anti-armour weapons like RPG-7Bs and 82mm recoilless guns.
Furthermore, weapons from previous wars supported by the super powers during the cold war have found their way to the Great Lakes region. The war between MPLA and UNITA in Angola, FLERIMO and RENAMO in Mozambique are cases in point.
Therefore, one negative aspect of globalisation has been the weakening of the capacity of the state to provide human security and easy proliferation of weapons and ammunitions to those groups that aspire to acquire political power by capturing the state, which is seen as an instrument of allocation of resources.
In summary the states in the Great Lakes region are characteristically marginal states economically and geo-politically in the international system. They are relatively isolated. They are undergoing a comprehensive crisis ideologically, economically, and are socially fluid. The states are continuously facing the challenge from social movements, political parties in opposition to open the political space and democratise the society in general. The demand for democratisation and failure by the states to protect their citizens is pushing some groups to resort to violence in order to redeem themselves.
Implications for peace and security
The proliferation of weapons and the wars in the Great Lakes region have negatively affected all aspects of security and peace. Violence has escalated between rival war lords, ethnic groups and inter-state militaries. This situation has generated refugees and caused a humanitarian crisis in terms of relief in basic necessities of life. Some refugees have turned into ‘warrior communities’ because they belong to former armies like Rwandese Armed Forces (FAR).
The wars in the region particularly the one in DRC has attracted other interests in form of interventions. Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, Zimbabwe, Angola, Namibia and Chad have fought in DRC ostensibly to defend their territorial integrity or restore stability that is for the case of Rwanda and Uganda; and for the rest, they claimed to defend the sovereignty of DRC from the so ‘called aggressors’.
As a result of the inter section of these interests pursued with the aid of violence and war, a number of war lords have emerged and many more are yet to be created. Indeed, violence has been internationalised and there is a possibility of the region sliding further to chaos. The security council of the UN has not put in adequate resources for a peace keeping force in the region. This is important because, the African initiative through the Lusaka Accord lacks the financial resources to be implemented fully.
The Challenge
How can we transform the culture of violence to a culture of peace and security? How can the states of the Great Lakes region avoid moving further to Strategic Environment Scenario C and move to Strategic Environment Scenario A as illustrated earlier in Table 1?
The dominant neo-liberal paradigm in the world today emphasises the limited role of the state in both national and international political economy. This is compounded by the disappointment people have had from the state, which was believed to carry a historical mission of liberating productive forces of society (at least from the Marxists and neo-Marxists).
However, the neo-liberal globalisation has not effectively provided opportunities to the Third World countries as it claims. Therefore, some people believe, that the role of state should be revisited. There is need to rethink, restructure or revitalise the state.
Even the torch bearers of neo-liberalism particularly the donors have accepted that a well functioning state – that can collect taxes, provide law and order, provide basic needs to the people is a pre-requisite for a free market. This is why the concepts of good governance, accountability and democratisation are high up on their agenda. It appears therefore, that there is consensus that the African state should be reconstructed in its relation with the citizens and how resources are allocated. A transparent allocation of resources, followed by accountability and freedom of the citizens to participate in decision making seems to be attractive to avoid violent means.
The statist school in the 1970s emphasised that power holders have created structures of domination that enable them to misuse their offices to reap personal gains at the expense of the pressing needs of the bulk of population. If Africa is undergoing a process of impoverishment, then leaders of the new states bear much of the blame for this state of affairs (Chazan, et al. 1988:20).
What the statist school raises, is the question of leadership of a state that is to be revitalised. Responsible leadership is important in designing appropriate responses to neo-liberalism globalisation. The Great Lakes region needs leadership that advocates and works for social globalisation, that is an inclusive process in which the gains made through global economic and social and political interactions are shared by the global citizenry, particularly the vulnerable, the marginalised and the poor. Social globalisation would then mean a humane globalisation that does not sacrifice those in need for satisfying the needs of those without loyalty to locality and the welfare of the vulnerable groups (Salim, 2000).
Where is the starting point?
In the Great Lakes region, the Ugandan experience seems to have inspired other revolutionaries. Attempts are being made to reconstruct the state on new terms with a new agenda.
Uganda is tapping the positive aspects of neo-liberal globalisation while at the same time building a functioning and responsive state to its citizens. The new agenda includes popular participation of the citizens in their governance through; a decentralised system of local government; a defence reform programme preceded by a defence review; human resource development (particularly universal primary education,) a mixed economy approach and commitment to regional and International peace initiatives.
Professionalisation of the army is expected to lead to control of spread of weapons, demobilisation and downsizing the military budget under the supervision of civil authority. It is important, therefore, to support a programme that will lead to demilitarisation of our societies, if we are to develop a culture of peace and security. The international community though the UN should also support such initiatives not only through resolutions but through action and material support.
Conclusion
The paper argues that violence in the Great Lakes region is not a new phenomenon, but the contemporary situation in the region has produced new forms of violence characterised by competing war lords and exploitation of natural resources by multinational corporate business enterprises.
The states in the Great Lakes region are characterised by weak economies, weak institutions of governance and refugees. Globalisation particularly neo-liberal globalisation has facilitated the weakening of these states. Furthermore, globalisation has enabled proliferation of weapons from the manufacturers to the war lords and the governments in the region. The uncontrolled movement of weapons from earlier wars of liberation, proxy wars fought during the cold war period have contributed to the militarisation of the communities in the region.
The paper proposes that there is need to rethink the African state. The state should be reconstructed in relation to its citizens and how resources are allocated. The paper emphasises the role of responsible leadership in the process of revitalising the state. One of the key areas that needs attention is the defense sector. This requires a comprehensive review and reform programme that will among other things demobilise the armed forces and reduce defence budgets. In short, professionalise the army and delimitarise the societies in the Great Lakes region for peace and security to prevail.
References
Axford, B (1995), The Global System: Economics, Politics and Culture. Cambridge, Polity Press.
Baldwin, D.A. (1997), ‘The Concept of Security’ in Review of International studies 23(1), 5-26
Boolt, K (1991), ‘Strategy and Emancipation’, in Review of International Studies, 17(4), 3130326.
Buzan, Barry, O. Waever and J. de Wilde (1998), Security A New Framework for Analysis, London, Lynne Rienner Publishers,
Chazan, Naomi et al. (1988), Politics and Society in Contemporary Africa. Boulder, Colorado, Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Frantz, Fanon (1963), The Wretched of the Earth. London, Penguin Books.
Galtung, J. (1988), Transarmament and the Cold War: Peace Research and the Peace Movement. Copenhagen, Christian Ejlers.
Garver, N. ‘What Violence Is’, The Nation. No. 209, 24 June 1968.
Graham, David. T and Nana Poku (2000), Migration, Globalisation and Human Security. NewYork, Rutledge.
Jinadu, Adele, L (1999), The Globalisation of Political Science: An African Perspective. A Paper presented at the plenary session at the 12th Biennal Congress of the African Association of Political Science (AAPS) 22-25 June, Dakar, Senegal.
Kim, S (1984), `Global violence and just world order’ in Journal of Peace Research, 21
Osuju, L (1997), ‘Structural Adjustment and Persistence of Economic Crisis in Africa’, in F. Edho (ed), Globalisation and the New World Order: Promises, Problems and Prospects for Africa in the 21 Century. Westport, Praeger.
Salim, Mohamed, M.A. (2000), Globalisation and Human Insecurity in Africa. A paper presented at the plenary session at the Sixth Congress of the Organisation for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA), 24-28 April Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
Scholle, Jan Aart (1998), Globalisation. A Paper presented at the opening of the 1998 Diploma programme at Institute of Social Studies, The Hague.
South Africa White Paper on Defence 1996.
Thomas, C. and P. Wilkin (eds), (1999), ‘Introduction’ in Human Security in the New World order: The African Experience. London, Lynne Rienner.