Drivers of African Instability Jeremy Astill-Brown March 2010

Scope Health warnings The African context Selected drivers of instability Force multipliers Instability and poverty Uncontrolled change Whose security is it anyway?

Health warnings Two problems with the title of this presentation: Not clear exactly what “instability” is; or if it automatically leads to bad things like violent conflict. Not clear that there is a peculiarly African form of instability. So this presentation is about instability in Africa and the factors that contribute to it.

African context (1) Africa has suffered greatly from instability and violent conflict. But these problems are not uniquely African and may stem as much from the current stage of Africa’s political, economic and social development as anything else. But global responses to instability in Africa are unique. Africa has (potentially) good political and economic institutions which seek to promote security and development; and manage instability and conflict. Common themes: symbiotic relationship between development and security; and belief that African failure will further impoverish and marginalise the continent and its people.

African context (2) Worth noting that most AU and NEPAD texts distinguish between “instability” – which they consider to be broadly economic in nature; and “security” – which is a matter of state sovereignty. A positive dimension in all African security and development organisations is stated willingness of African leaders to take responsibility for reducing instability and conflict. But there seems to be a difference between what some African leaders say in intergovernmental forums, and what they do at home. Need to empower the mechanisms; and hold member states to account for their performance.

Selected drivers of instability

Force multipliers Often assumed that religion and ethnicity are the common cause of much instability and conflict. They are not. But they are good mobilisers – or “force multipliers” – with which to convert social, economic and political exclusion into a political (or even military) constituency. These factors confuse the situation more than they explain it. External partnerships play a negative role too: –Very large commercial investments often undermine governance mechanisms to win the rights they require, weakening the due process of government and rarely translating into wider good; –International security partnerships are over focussed on threats to the wider world that transit Africa rather than on the threats to Africa.

Instability and poverty Increasing evidence that instability and poverty are linked. Whilst conflict affected populations “account for only a fifth of the population of developing countries, they include a third of those living in extreme poverty, half of the children who are not in primary school and half of children who die before their fifth birthday”. But many countries – eg Tanzania; Malawi; etc – meet these criteria and do not appear to suffer from systematic violent conflict. Poverty alone doesn’t lead to instability or conflict. There must be another factor.

Uncontrolled change (1) In order to stay in power, many leaders make deals and concessions – either with other members of an elite; or with external parties. (Or both.) Keeping on top of these arrangements is time consuming and difficult. Doing so is what passes for politics in many places. External shocks – ranging from disease and natural disaster to global economic events - to finely balanced power relations could lead to uncontrolled change; and leaders often over compensate to remain at the top. Prevailing African culture of government is nationalist and liberation in nature. It confuses the freedoms of a post-colonial society with the individuals or groups who won it. And it emphasises continued gratitude (and obedience) of the people over hearing their views and aspirations.

Uncontrolled change (2) Left to their own devices, most societies find equilibrium – they are “self righting”. But they cannot do so when artificial, external influences incentivise continuing imbalance. The result is instability. Worth noting that although most donors, for example, recognise this, their own investments often assume a continuation of the status quo rather than positive change in the future.

Whose security is it anyway? Despite the links between security and development, there are clear tensions between them when applied to the political, economic and social context in Africa. Hard to escape the view that most elites are primarily motivated by remaining power, confusing their own best interests with those of the populations they govern. So the key questions when looking at security issues in the context of preventing instability and conflict and promoting development are: –Whose security? –For what purpose? Exam question:

Thank you Jeremy Astill-Brown (T) (M) Acacia Development Associates provide policy analysis, advice and development which will help their clients to: plan strategically and holistically for future challenges; and generate appropriate and practical solutions to real world problems.