Ruhr-Universität Bochum
Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict
Geopolitics in World Society, NOHA 2005/6

The sovereignty versus intervention dilemma:
the challenge of conflict prevention

by: Thorsten Volberg

Table of contents

1. Introduction p. 3

2. Conflict Prevention on the agenda p. 3

3. Preventive Policy p. 5

3.1. Root Cause Prevention efforts p. 6
3.2. Direct Prevention efforts p. 7
3.3. The legal ground of Preventive Policy p. 8

4. Difficulties of Conflict Preventive Policy p. 8

4.1. Target States p. 8
4.2. International Community p. 9

5. Political response p. 10

5.1. Coordination p. 10
5.2. Encouragement p. 11
5.3. The role of Humanitarian Assistance in Conflict Prevention p. 11

6. Conclusion p. 12

7. Bibliography p. 14

8. Appendix p. 16

“… if humanitarian intervention is, indeed, an
unacceptable assault on sovereignty, how should
we respond to a Rwanda, to a Srebrenica – to gross
and systematic violations of human rights that
offend every precept of our common humanity?”
(Kofi Annan, Millennium Report 2000)

1. Introduction

In some regions of the world, a fundamental development crisis has increased the conflicting situation between society and the struggle for equal distribution. Deformed and failed processes of modernization and transformation manifest and cause a politicised society. Ethnic struggles, failing states and social processes of chaos lead to warlike conflicts and political structures have to be installed while the economy and the society are influenced by force. Focussing on the states of Sub-Sahara Africa, which often only have a formal existence, a World Bank Discussion Paper describes the current status of many of these countries as a „stable situation of instability“ (Michailof i.a. 2001). This instability often leads to so called “political economies of threat and combat” (Herbst 2002), which includes a growing number of people who have an interest in the maintenance of the conflict and a high propensity for violence. An important challenge of the international community is to deal with the possibilities of a preventive policy that would minimize the chances of such political radicalization. Furthermore, the question remains of how to react if state failures finally lead to massive human rights violations and even genocide within those countries.

2. Conflict Prevention on the agenda

The end of the alignment policy after the Cold War brought a change of economic and political interests on the international level, and led to a further breakout of inter- and intrastate conflicts in certain developing countries. National borders in conflict areas started to become less relevant since former local crises seemed to put development efforts of whole regions into danger, especially concerning the effects of migration or criminalisation (von Plate 2003). In a number of Asian and African countries, local parties and warlords took control of parts of state territory, including its natural resources and production plants where the national governments had lost its influence. This development worsened the situation of the local population dramatically by adversely affecting social and human security, economic redistribution and public services, like medical supply, schools and infrastructure. Militarization equally involves the negative influence that armed gangs, warring factions, and elements in society exercise over the state and public policy. As well, in conditions where the economy has been uncharacteristically militarised, democratic regimes are quite often forced to operate under unfavourable conditions where democratic projects become hostage to direct and indirect military interest. (Ihonvbere 2002)

The expenses of humanitarian aid in Conflict- and Post-Conflict-situations increased as part of the official development assistance and consequently, the availability of funds for sustainable development projects decreased (Kaldor & Münkler 2002). Within the international community, the issue arose to put more effort in crisis prevention, rather than waiting for a conflict to actually break out before reacting. Therefore former UN-Secretary General Boutros-Ghali addressed this point when he published his Agenda for Peace in 1992 and brought up the ‘peace and security’ issue by focussing on ‘Preventive Diplomacy’, ‘Peace-Making’, ‘Peace-Keeping’ and ‘Post-Conflict Peace-Building’. His recommendations were called on to be a “model for the work of the United Nations in a changing world” (Loges & Menzel 2004). The UN Secretary-General’s report on The Causes of Conflict and the Promotion of Durable Peace and Sustainable Development in Africa’ followed in 1998. Additionally, the OECD¹ brought out the DAC-Guidelines on Conflict, Peace and Development Cooperation in 1997 and the Council of the European Union published its Resolution on the Role of Development Cooperation in Peacebuilding Measures and the Prevention and Solution of Conflicts in 1998.

The discussion went further and led to the question if the international community should have the right to intervene in sovereign states if the national governments fail to protect its citizens from massive human rights violations. For this reason, the Canadian government installed the ‘International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty’ (ICISS) to work on the legal, moral, operational and political aspects of this question. Conflict prevention is seen by the commission not merely as a national or local affair but as a global issue, since the failure of prevention can have wide international consequences and costs. Their report published in December 2001, The Responsibility to Protect, intended to help the United Nations find a new common ground on these issues.

“… your title really describes, what I was talking about:
the fact that sovereignty implies responsibilities as well as
powers; and that among this responsibilities, none is
more important than protecting citizens from violence and
war.” (Commentary by Kofi Annan after the publication
of The Responsibility to Protect by the ICISS;
Chesterman 2002)

3. Preventive Policy

[...]

1 OECD - Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; DAC - Development Assistance Commitee (Committee for Development Aid of the OECD)