Search results
between the two main agendas through which the Lula government projected Brazilian power: on the one hand, the diffusion of power in the international system, the construction of a more democratic global order; and, on the other, the promotion of an ethical order associated explicitly with human rights, which included the fight against hunger – the product of a policy of ‘non-indifference’, to use your phrase. CA: Sure, there was. And I was often criticised. But in fact many of the critiques came from outside Brazil and were to do with the way we
African regional organizations have played leading roles in constructing collective conflict management rules for the continent, but these rules or norms have not been static. Currently, the African Union (AU) deploys monitors, authorizes peace support operations, and actively engages in internal conflicts in member states. Just a few decades ago these actions would have been deeply controversial under the Organization of African Unity (OAU). What changed to allow for this transformation in the way the African regional organization approaches peace and security? Drawing extensively on primary source documents from the AU Commission archives, this book examines why the OAU chose norms that prioritized state security in 1963 leading to a policy of strict non-interference and why the AU chose very different norms leading to a disparate conflict management policy of non-indifference in the early 2000s. Even if the AU’s capacity to respond to conflict is still developing, this new policy has made the region more willing and capable of responding to violent conflict. The author argues that norm creation largely happened within the African context, and international pressure was not a determinant factor. The role of regional organizations in the international order, particularly those in the African region, has been under-theorized and under-acknowledged, and this book adds to an emerging literature that explores the role of regional organizations in the Global South in creating and promoting norms based on their own experiences and for their own purposes.
One of the major critiques of the AU is that the shift in peace and security from non-interference under the OAU to non-indifference under the AU is purely cosmetic, and the results show no tangible difference in outcomes. This chapter spells out the extent of the change in norms, institutions, policies, and practices between the OAU and the AU to first show that there is a real difference between the two organizations. It sets a baseline of the OAU and AU norms, institutions, and policies and then explores how these played out in practice. I am not making an
to our understanding of norm creation within the specific spaces of regional organizations. As such, it has implications both for the role that regional organizations play in shaping norms in their own spheres and also the role they play in shaping and promoting international norms. Specifically, I ask why the OAU chose norms in 1963 that underpinned a non-interference conflict management policy and why the AU chose very different norms in the early 2000s that led to a non-indifference conflict management policy. I argue that African regional organizations
Findings This book proposes an argument to augment our understanding of how regional organizations contribute to international society by analyzing the process of norm creation and evolution and the subsequent institutional and policy manifestations at the regional level in Africa. It has examined why the OAU chose specific norms in 1963 that manifested in a non-interference conflict management policy and what led the AU to codify different norms in the early 2000s that led to a non-indifference conflict management policy. In 1963, the regional organization
This book explores the evolving African security paradigm in light of the multitude of diverse threats facing the continent and the international community today and in the decades ahead. It challenges current thinking and traditional security constructs as woefully inadequate to meet the real security concerns and needs of African governments in a globalized world. The continent has becoming increasingly integrated into an international security architecture, whereby Africans are just as vulnerable to threats emanating from outside the continent as they are from home-grown ones. Thus, Africa and what happens there, matters more than ever. Through an in-depth examination and analysis of the continent’s most pressing traditional and non-traditional security challenges—from failing states and identity and resource conflict to terrorism, health, and the environment—it provides a solid intellectual foundation, as well as practical examples of the complexities of the modern African security environment. Not only does it assess current progress at the local, regional, and international level in meeting these challenges, it also explores new strategies and tools for more effectively engaging Africans and the global community through the human security approach.
, Secretary General Salim addressed non-interference, arguing, “While the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of Member States should continue to be observed, it should, however, not be construed to mean or used to justify indifference on the part of the OAU.” 10 Here we see an allusion to a concept of non-indifference in a 1990 report. Non-indifference was certainly not used in the same way by Salim Ahmed Salim as it is used today to indicate an encompassing policy and architecture, but it is an early indication of efforts to balance non
Africa, Williams focuses on the internal contradictions of OAU policy as well as pressure from the international to conform to transnational liberal and human rights norms as the two most important factors that led to a change from non-interference under the OAU to non-indifference under the AU. 4 Specifically examining the role of international influence, Williams argues that a process of norm localization took place, with Africa drawing on the R2P doctrine, that was developed in the ICISS report and drew on the work of Francis Deng, and adapting it for the African
1970s and the response of the OAU in the late 1970s and early 1980s show the process through which ideas that prioritized state security were discredited and the beginnings of evolving pan-Africanist ideas that led to a focus on human security. However, the process was not linear, and there were multiple failed attempts at reform before the ideas that would guide the shift from non-interference to non-indifference were fully formed. It is also important to acknowledge that there were other atrocities during this period, such as those committed by the Derg in
-Africanism’, International Organization, 16:2 (1962), 280. 6 Ibid., 288. 7 P. Williams, ‘From non-intervention to non-indifference: The origins of development of the African Union’s security culture’, African Affairs 106:423 (2007), 257. 8 Ibid., pp. 253−79. The African response 213 9 C. Legum, ‘The organisation of African unity—success or failure?’ International Affairs, 51:2 (1975), 208. 10 H. Selassie, ‘Towards African unity’, Journal of Modern African Studies, 1:3 (1963), 285. 11 Legum, ‘The organisation of African unity’, p. 209. 12 Selassie, ‘Towards African unity’, p