Demobilization and re-integration of ex-combatants,its effects on development

Demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants are post war reconstruction efforts that facilitate the consolidation of peace as well as the promotion of development in post conflict zones. The absence of peace derails development through such factors like the loss of human capital; destruction of infrastructure; prevalence of hunger and diseases; decline of foreign direct investment; absence of a democratic political system, societal as well as a vibrant economic structure which are all necessary ingredients for development.

Demobilization is a result of an end to conflict or a result of peace negotiations made by parties to the conflict which encompasses the process of removing weapons from the hands of combatants as well as taking the combatants out of military structures during post-conflict peace building .It is therefore, the disbanding and discharging of combatants who have been actively involved in war. This definition of demobilization is derived from the UN Peacekeeping Department which notes that demobilization is the formal and controlled discharge of active combatants from armed forces and groups, including a phase of “reinsertion” which provides short-term assistance to ex-combatants. Reinsertion is a support package provided to the demobilized ex-combatants prior to the long term reintegration  which covers the basic needs of ex-combatants and their families thus safety allowances, food, clothes, shelter, medical services, short term education, skills training, employment and tools.

 Reintegration is a long-term, it is a process of returning former combatants to their community of origin. Reintegration entails a process by which ex-combatants acquire civilian status and gain sustainable employment and income. It also involves a political, social and economic process with an open time-frame, primarily taking place in communities at the local level followed by monitoring and evaluation of the ex-combatants.  

 Ex-combatant refers to someone who previously and actively participated or used for war purposes.

Development as a result of its manifestations and causes shall mean the transitional movement of a society from the causes of war to peace .The main thrust of demobilization and reintegration is to reduce former combatants’ ability and desire to renew combat or to engage in criminal violence whilst at the same time turning them back into productivity members of the society on a more sustainable basis in order to enhance societal development.

Mitigation of armed conflicts and establishment of peace is one of the ways in which demobilizations impacts positively on development .In that armed groups or ex-combatants through demobilization are disarmed, disintegrated, disbanded and discharged from their military structures and camps as was witnessed after the second chimurenga in Zimbabwe. Thereby mitigating the susceptibility of the ex-combatants from re-arming and returning back to war .In that war derails development as it result in the destruction of both the political economy and social moral fiber which is the key cornerstone  on which development is hinged upon. More often, war leads to the destruction of infrastructure critical for the provision of services needed for development like education and health facilities which is the current position in Syria.

 Demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants prevents the mass rape and mutilation of women, girls and boys, child soldiering is rampant in Somalia due to the existence of Al Shabab and also in Afghanistan due to the prevalence of Al Quade and the Taliban. These crimes against humanity under the international humanitarian law are a gross human right violation which is tantamount to the suffocation of the promotion of human security.  Thus demobilization through such processes like debriefing, reorientation, and counseling are imperative in the process of turning ex-combatants into productive members of the society and as well as facilitate the long transitional movement process from war to peace which would translate into the promotion of development in general .

 Failure to demobilize and reintegrate ex-combatants will provide a fertile ground for the reoccurrences of war as happened in the current DRC crisis whereby it is estimated that more than   8 000 ex-combatants have re-entered the war in the North Kivu province. Examples of a successful demobilization and reintegration by the AU and UN were seen in the case of Angola in 1999 ,Burundi 2009,Liberia 2009,Zimbabwe 1980 in which it can be safely asserted that these countries has enjoyed relative peace that has promoted social, economic and political advancement of the afore-mentioned  countries.

In addition to the afore mentioned point recreational, education, job training skills, and psycho-social counseling activities  conducted during demobilization are also important factors that impact positively on development .For instance through such demobilization activities like education, former child soldiers are assisted in resuming their education due to the fact that war results in the destruction of educational facilities like schools as well as the failure of children to attend school. Therefore through such psycho-social support programs like the resumption in education, demobilization plays an important role in enhancing human capital development which has been previous disrupted by the emergence of conflict .Moreover, pre-discharge orientation and information and referral programs also prepares and direct combatants for the upcoming transition to civilian life and also increases their confidence as well as change their perceptions in not viewing war as the only tool to make a living or put forward a grievance .

Put in other words ,psycho-social support programs through the demobilization process plays an important role in mitigating the notion of viewing the use of violence to pursue different goals as well as reducing the risk of ex-combatants fuelling up new violence which in other terms has a negative bearing on societal reconstruction and development .This is being premised on the fact that many combatants have been victims or perpetrators of horrendous violence and  this may have left deep emotional and psychological scars that may be reflected in depression, apathy and  rage  only to mention a few. Thus psycho-social support is an important tool for post-war trauma counseling and reconstruction to which if it is not carried out it will result in the returning of ex-combatants to war as violence will be viewed as a normal way of life and survival.

Furthermore demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants also plays an important role in mitigating the risk of spreading HIV/AIDS and other diseases which has an enormous challenge in the quest for development in the third world .According to Human Right Watch the mass rapes carried out by rebel movements such as the M-23in the DRC, Joseph Kony’s Lord Resistance Army in Uganda, CAR and Sudan has led to the widespread of STIs and HIV/AIDS Amongst the victims.

The promotion of human security is also one of the key positive impacts that demobilization has on development. Demobilization of ex-combatants is one of the factors that promotes human security in post conflict zones .In that during conflict situations ,human security is not guaranteed as it results in the infringement of the once sacrosanct fundamental human rights and freedoms with notable examples being the Somalian crisis ,the recent Central African Republic crisis .In which the failure to guarantee human security has resulted in not only various forms of atrocities and casualties  being committed against  civilians but also on the combatants side .Thus with demobilization ,the probability of ex-combatants regrouping or re-arming is minimized .To which this does not only  enhance the prevalence of peace but also leads to the promotion and realization human rights .In that human security entails the protection of  political ,social and economic rights from harm that can lead to such unpleasant factors like massive exodus of refugees which can also result in brain drain as happened in the cases of DRC ,Somalia and the recent South Sudan crisis. Therefore the promotion of human security can be denoted to mean the promotion of democracy as well as development in general.

Demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants plays an important apart in economic recovery of a country as it restores investors’ confidence, as well as creating conducive environment for the flourishing of economic activities in general. This is so basing on the fact that violent conflict disturbs the performance of productive economic sectors due to such factors like limited human resource as well as financial investments; destruction of industrial sites; the disruption of the production chain of raw materials as happened in the case of failed states like Libya, Central Africa Republic, and Somalia. Successful demobilization and reintegration has led to economic recovery as has been recorded in the case of Rwanda in the aftermath of the horrendous and despicable 1994 genocide in which the relative prevalence of peace in this country has helped Rwanda to become one of the fast emerging economies in Africa.

Furthermore, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants has a positive bearing on development as it facilitates national healing, reconciliation as well as promoting socio-economic and political pluralism and toleration .National healing and reconciliation helps in mitigating the risk of ex-combatants being treated like outcasts, which  will force them returning to their old ways of using violence or force  as a means of survival .Therefore ,the promotion of national healing and reconciliation through such factors like peace and justice commissions as notable in the case in the case of Rwanda’s war crimes tribunals development enhanced in unifying once divided and broken societies .

 In addition to the afore mentioned point, demobilization and reintegration plays an important role in not only returning ex-combatants to the civilian life but also gives them a sense of responsibility in contributing positively to national development .Ex-combatants during these processes are equipped with psychological, technical and financial support aimed at making them active productive members of the society who are divorced from the use of violence .This can be noted in the case of Sierra Leone through a UNAMSIL “Stop Gap Program” in which 6 000 ex-combatants participated in rebuilding infrastructure they destroyed during the war .

However on the other side of the spectrum it should also be acknowledged that demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants has its own flaws like the diversion of national funds from other development activities .It should be noted that demobilization and reintegration are not a one day process but takes much time and requires a lot of funds .In Somalia demobilization was not a success due to such factors like limited funding as noticed by ‘The Mandhera’ encampment in Somaliland which had a capacity for 1,200 ex-combatants but held about 5,000. After six months the encampment was abruptly closed because it was badly planned, poorly resourced and raised unrealistic expectations of massive training and employment. Widespread unrest among the demobilized followed until they dispersed and returned to their militias which were potential sources of instability.

In summation, demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants promotes human freedoms, restores investor confidence, political pluralism, tolerance and infrastructural development in post war torn communities .Thus in the quest of sustainable development it is imperative to note that peace processes through demobilization and reintegration of former combatants are core in reducing and ending civil wars.  

The International Criminal Court discriminatory against African leaders?

Although devised to deal with international crimes the Operations by the International Criminal Court can be attributed to be discriminatory against its indictment of African personalities such as Charles Taylor, Thomas Lubanga, Abdallah Banda, and Uhuru Kenyatta over international crimes. From its inception in July 2002 to current date the ICC has indicted 36 personnel, it has opened investigations in 8 countries of which all of them are African countries. International crimes are crimes that transcend sovereignty and attracts universal jurisdiction, and can be categorised as war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, torture aggression and terrorism. on the other hand the ICC in its operations is not discriminatory, rather it is abiding by its founding principles that of indicting and trial of cases referred to it by member states and United Nations Security Council as well as its jurisdiction of states that have ratified the Rome statute.

From its inception in 2002 the ICC has opened investigations in 8 countries. The 8 countries that the ICC is investigating on international crimes are namely DRC, Uganda, Central African Republic, Sudan, Kenya Libya, Ivory Coast and Mali, all of which are African countries. This clearly shows that the court in its operations is discriminatory in that wars are being fought globally and international crimes are being committed everywhere, for instance the war against terror by USA on Afghanistan were it is attributed that America is torturing the victims of war. Thus instead of indicting Bush and Blair of war crimes they have indicted African leaders such Omar AL Bashir and Muammar Gaddafi on war crimes.

The ICC came as a result of the ratification of the Rome statute thus the court has jurisdiction of member states. The ICC instead of being bound on indicting member states it has taken the privileged to indict African non-member states. The ICC has indicted African personnel from the countries that have not ratified the Statute for crimes against humanity hence they are not member states. The examples of the personnel include the indictment of Bahr Abu Garda in 2009, Abdallah Banda 2009 who are from Sudan and Charles Ble Goude 2011and Simone Gbagbo 2012 from Ivory Coast.

The ICC defines crimes against humanity as acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population with knowledge of the attack and the definition also includes that these attacks are not isolated or sporadic events but are acts that form part of government policy, or a systematic practice of atrocities tolerated by the government. With this definition this lead to the indictment of African leaders such as former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi indicted in 2011 on 2 counts of crimes against humanity, Laurent Gbagbo in 2011 on 4 counts of crimes against humanity, Uhuru Kenyatta in 2011 on 5 counts and also some other personalities such as Joseph kony on 12 counts in 2005, Germain Katanga 3 counts in 2007, Thomas Lubanga on 3 counts in 2006, Abdallah banda on 3 counts to mention a few on crimes against humanity. This is discriminatory against the backdrop that American is using drones in attacking and killing civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan each and every day and drone attacks has become part of the government policy, but the American leaders such as Bush and Obama have not been indicted on crimes against humanity.

Article II of Genocide convention defines a genocide as the killing of members of an ethnic, racial or religious group it also goes on to say that it entails deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part and this include subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the reduction of essential medical services below the minimum requirements (Dugard 2005; 180).  Using this definition one can alludes that genocide is being practiced in countries like Israel and Iraq were in Israel there has been the killing and displacement of Palestinians as well as the killings and displacement of the Muslims in Iraq by the United States. America is also using torture in its fight against terrorism; the torture in Guantanamo bay. According to Press TV (2014/ 04/30) the shelling of the Palestinians by Israel is genocide for it wants to cause an extinction of the Palestinians. On the contrary the ICC has already indicted Omar Al-Bashir for a 3 counts of genocide. He is alleged to have ordered the attack on the Fur, Masalit and Zaghawa populations that were perceived to be sympathetic with the rebels. This has been labelled as genocide for it was defined as causing serious bodily and mental harm and deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction of an ethic group.

War crimes are crimes committed in violation of international humanitarian law. War crimes are governed by the principle of jus in Bello can be categorised into crimes against civilians and combatants. In the indictment of personnel on war crimes the ICC is discriminatory to African personnel. War crimes are committed everywhere in the world, in the Syrian conflict there was the use of Chemical weapons on civilians, USA is torturing prisoners of wars in Guantanamo bay and is also attacking civilians using drones in Iraq and Pakistan. All these perpetrators of war crimes were not indicted by the ICC but rather African personnel such as Abdallah Banda, Omar Al-Bashir, Bahr Abu Garda, Jean-Pierre Bemba, Ahmed Haroun to mention a few.

Another imperative feature on the ICC on its operations is on its sponsorship and composition. Although America has not ratified the Roman statute it sponsors the operations of the ICC and it also has judges in the ICC. America has deployed its troops in the hunt for Joseph Kony and his generals. USA is part of the Nations Security Council that can refer cases to the ICC thus the USA cannot refer for the indictment of its leaders as well as its partners in crimes for instance Britain and France who are involved in the killing and displaced of Iraqis.

On the other hand the operations by the ICC on the indictment of African personnel cannot be articulated as discriminatory rather the exercise of its duties and obligations. Firstly the Roman statute has jurisdiction on member states; those that have ratified the statute.34 African countries have ratified the statute. Countries like Uganda, Kenya, DRC and Central African Republic have ratified the statute. Thus the indictment of personal such as Joseph kony, Raska Lukwinya, Okot Odhiambo, Bosco Ntaganda, Thomas Lubanga and Germain Katanga cannot be attributed as discriminatory but rather the exercise to bring to justice the perpetrators of International crimes. 

The UNSC may refer a situation to the ICC when it feels that there is a breach international peace in accordance with chapter VII of the UN charter, even if it involves a nation of a member state. These referrals saw the indictment of the Sudanese leader and that of Muammar Gaddafi and son on crimes and humanity as well as personalities like Bahr Abu Garda, Mohammed Ali, Abdallah Banda, and Walter Barassa. Thus the referral of these African leaders by the ICC cannot be painted discriminatory rather but rather an exercise of its mandate.  

The indictment of African personalities is as a result of the prevalence of wars in the continent. The creation of the ICC was inspired by the International Criminal Tribunals of Rwanda and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia established in response to crimes committed in both countries. Thus the prevalence of wars in Africa as well as the influence of the Rwandan genocide leads to the focus in Africa for war crimes. The notion being that whenever there is a high prevalent of war , war crimes will follow, so this leads to the focus on Africa and as a result leads to the indictment of African personalities on war crimes and crimes against humanity.  

The ICC is a subsidiary or complementarity to national courts. By being a subsidiary or being complementary the ICC is devised to trial cases that are referred to it by states that have either failed to trial or cases or in which they feel the perpetrators can temper with judgement. This clearly shows that the indictment of African personalities is per African dictates thus the ICC is not discriminatory rather complimentary.

To conclude, although the court indicts and trials perpetrators of international crimes the court is discriminatory in its operations for since its inception it has indicted 36 African personalities, it has opened investigations to international crimes in 8 African countries as well as its extension to indict African personnel in states it does not have a jurisdiction over.

Identity based conflicts in the globe

 The causes of identity conflicts include, the inability of the state to perform its responsibilities owing to poor leadership, endemic corruption, lopsided federal arrangements, poverty, historical legacy and the inability to reverse the ills of history, elite politics, ancient  hatred and religious differences among other causal factors. The  state’s weakness and fragility is the central cause of terror the world over. For example, Nigeria has since inception as a federation been a fragile and weak nation as in effect it is impossible to fully realize statehood and development. The country operates a disaggregated union which does not represent the desires of the people. In this writing examples shall be drawn from Lesotho, Tunisia, Madagascar, Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of  Congo and other African states.

Identity conflicts involve contest between and amongst groups in the society. These can be  ethnic, tribal, religious or cultural conflicting  over economic, political and social issues and resources, especially, where a group cannot or is prohibited from pursuing or achieving its goals within the state. Demonstrations, riots and even rebellions are tactics usually utilized to pursue their goals. They mostly arise from competition for ownership of the state and control of its resources and the expropriation of  identity, symbols and resources of the state by one group to the exclusion of other structural violence, competition of state resources and relative depreciation, security dilemma on the part of groups. The ultimate goal of these contests are based on the need for allocation, reallocation, distribution of power, privileges and resources which are done and carried out within crucial distributive decisions (Baker, 1995:1; Ikelegbe and Okumu, 2010:21).

In all human relations, contests and rivalries occur as human beings eke out existence, they relate in competition over the limited resources nature offers and those made by man himself. The contest over different preferences which are sometimes carried out with high intensity of conflicts most often leads to violence some of which are resolved peacefully or sometimes through violence. Conflict is an inevitable aspect of human interaction, an unavoidable concomitant of choices and decision (Zartman, 1997:197). Conflicts can be resource based, when they manifest over limited resources. Ideological conflicts arise from one’s ideology and identity, mismanagement of information which can promote peace or conversely generate conflicts. The various types of conflicts are broadly categorized as intra-state, internationalized intra state and inter-state. (Miller, 2005).

Conflict and peace are therefore mechanisms for realizing goals and for resolving disparities in preferences in culture, value, ideology, religion and belief systems. This exclusionary form of politics is a major reason behind identity conflicts all over the world particularly in a highly plural and heterogeneous nation like Nigeria. For example, the deliberate economic discrimination against what are seen as a privileged group, such as the Tamils in Sri Lanka, has been evident. A classic issue is the question of minority language rights or religious freedoms. The conflict over language rights in the Baltic states between the local and Russian-speaking populations . The Sri Lankan conflict has been fueled by the proximity and involvement of India; the Northern Ireland conflict by the competing claims of Britain and the Irish Republic and the involvement of Irish Americans; the Cyprus conflict is intertwined with the dispute between Turkey and Democracy and Deep-Rooted Conflict: Options for Negotiators Greece, and so on. Understanding these international dimensions is key to any analysis of the conflict itself. Tension between “settler” and “indigenous” groups is present in almost all states in which such terms are meaningful. Indian

settlers in Fiji; Chinese and Indians in Malaysia; Russians in the Baltics and Central Asian Republics: all are examples of groups who are seen as being less than fully legitimate members of a multi-ethnic state by their indigenous counterparts. The legacy of colonialism thus plays a role in many of the current eruptions of identity-related conflict.

 Market liberalisation and democratisation in the 1990s substantially weakened the post-colonial state, ushering in new forms of violence and disorder as the hallmark of the post-Cold War Africa. Although  they often overflowed across national borders and affected the neighbouring countries called  the ‘bad neighbourhood’ syndrome (Young 2004:44). One example among many is the legacy left in Western Sahara by the departing Spanish in 1975: an artificial frontier between Morocco and “Spanish Sahara” which became the subject of a long dispute between the Moroccan state and the Polisario Front, the army of the Saharawi people. Put simply, their sense of themselves as a community – their ethnic identity – contradicted the arbitrary map lines drawn by the colonizer, and they set about correcting the map as soon as they were free to do so. A difference of identity, combined with a dispute over territory, resulted in violent conflict, which remains unresolved today. Similarly, as Britain left the Indian subcontinent in 1947, bitter fighting erupted between identity groups organized along religious lines. The result was the partitioning of the area between India and Pakistan. But, as so often, simple partition has failed to satisfy the underlying root-causes of the conflict: in Kashmir and

It is true, as the former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan (1998:3), argues, that the ‘sources of conflict in Africa reflect diversity and complexity. Africa’s ethnic diversity has been blamed for the escalation of violent conflict and the implosion of the state. In the post-Cold War era, such identities as Tutsi, Croats or Hindu have appeared armour-plated in deadly combats that have mirrored Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilisations on a global scale (Huntington 1996; Ross 2000; Deng 2005; Horowitz 1985). Ethnic  identity on its own does not necessarily cause or perpetuate violent conflict, it has become ‘a sort of universal shorthand that marks a host of much more complex issues of identity and difference’ (Broch-Due 2005:6; Khazanov et al 2004). The greed-and-grievance thesis, has described the link between the escalation of identity-based civil conflicts and the unfolding war economies which feed and fuel them (Collier & Sambanis 2005; Elbadawi & Sambanis 2000).

Despite, it has become clear that identities have a role to play in conflict resolution. Organisations like UNESCO (2005) and the African Union (2005) have embraced cultural diversity and the expression of different identities as important assets in peacemaking and nation building. Indeed, authors like Tan celebrate the diversity of identities as an asset in the re-engineering of the civic order (Tan 2006). Ethnicity  therefore is not in itself a venal force.

Following the end of the Cold War, Africa became a theatre of violent conflicts from Burundi to Liberia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Sierra Leone, Somalia to Rwanda and Guinea to Sudan. The indelible mark of the new wars is that they are linked to identity, particularly ethnic identity. While there are many identity markers such as race, nationhood, kinship, class, religion, language, gender, age, geographic location, cultural preferences, and occupation,  such as military function or herders and tillers.  By  and large ethnicity is identified as the dominant axis about which conflicts have revolved.

 This violence is seen as a return to barbarism (Mamdani 2002). With the emergence of pluralist democracy, this violence has been seen as a ploy by the incumbents to undermine democracy and perpetuate themselves in power (Kagwanja 2001). Some  scholars view the explosion of ethnic-based violence in countries like Rwanda as a manifestation of the brutal legacy of manipulation of ethnicity in the colonial past now returning to haunt the post-colonial state (Mamdani 2001).

The reason of identity wars is based on the fact that ethnic identity is indeed particularly strong in traditional societies – embodying the deeply-embedded sense of belonging to a group with unique identity markers, such as myths of common ancestry, shared memories, cultural values, traditions and symbols, and ownership of territory (Endalew 2002).

Ethnic  identity does not sufficiently explain communal wars and homogeneous nations like Somalia have been engulfed in civil war while many heterogeneous societies live in peace,  (Osman:2007). Further, the so-called African traditional identities are often recent constructions, either by colonial powers or by their post-colonial successors, resulting in mythologies of Africanist cultures (Banégas 2006; Bayart 2005).

Appadurai (1998) explaining the implosion of ethnic-based violence and identity conflict is linked to the forces of globalisation. He  noted that ethnic violence is deeply rooted in the uncertainties, anxieties, disillusions and chaotic environments created by economic globalisation. A case in point was the dehumanizing state of  violence against  citizens typified by the Nazi Holocaust or, more recently, ethnic cleansing in the now defunct Yugoslavia. The violence is non-revolutionary and ‘non-liberative.  Another case in point was the Rwandan genocide between the Hutu and Tutsi.

 Above that, in Sudan when they came face to face with this new form of violence, the leaders of the one-party state  resorted to recruiting surrogates and clients to organise violence against rebellious citizens. Mohamed Salih (1989) unveiled how the Sudanese state recruited tribal militias to terrorise civilian populations in a move that contributed to the ‘re-tribalisation’ of politics. Recently the state recruited nearly one hundred  boys from thirteen years to save in the national army. The practice became widespread in countries as diverse as Nigeria, Cameroon, Kenya, Malawi and South Sudan.

They are also linked to complex proxy wars involving regional powers. Ethnic militias, combatants or bandits feed into ‘economies of war’ which are inextricably connected to globalised illegal economic networks and contrabands in precious metals, gemstones, drugs, guns and human trafficking. The war in Somalia, for example, has also come to be linked to the longstanding conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea, with both protagonists underwriting and backing rival forces within the country. Moreover, as the case of America’s involvement in Somalia allegedly to root out the Union of Islamic Courts’ fighters shows, what are viewed as internal wars are also linked to the ‘clash of civilisations’ which now defines the parameters of the global war on terrorism.

Ethnicity became central to the colonial divide-and-rule device used for the purpose of political control,  enforcement of taxes and extraction of wealth (Broch-Due 2005; Rubin 2006). For example, the Belgian and French ascribed the Hamitic ‘race’ identity to the Tutsis in Rwanda as against the ‘Bantu tribal’ identity of the Hutus. This flawed classification laid the foundation for ethnic rivalry and conflict which culminated to the 1994 genocide (Prunier 1997). The colonial manipulation of ethnicity bequeathed Africa’s post-colonial societies with the polarities of settler and native  categories. These have become the axis about which ethnic violence in Rwanda or  in Kenya rotates (Mamdani 1996:201).

Africa’s post-colonial states inherited these ethnic stereotypes and divisive patterns of power between and within specific ethnic identities, thus sowing the seeds of competition and conflict along ethnic fault-lines. It did not help the matter that many post-colonial patrimonial elites continued this legacy of divide-and-rule to protect their power. The decline of the hegemonic state and socio-citizenship opened the vent for rival ethnic groups to challenge the authority of the central state and the ruling elite.

With the collapse of the nationalist consensus that ushered Africa into independence, the one-party state was widely imposed across the continent as a single identity group or a coalition of several identity groups. Corruption and lack of accountability became the norm as pressure intensified on public servants to use their civic positions to satisfy their own imperatives of sharing resources with members of their larger communities. With no other recourse, those communities that felt excluded from the state and discriminated against by the dominant group often resorted to violent tactics. This happens especially when the stakes for survival are heightened by democratic competition diminishing economic opportunities, livelihoods and increasing poverty.

The predatory nature of the African state, where the dominant elite appropriates and personalises the state, using it as an instrument of self-enrichment and of rewarding ethnic kith and kin clients. Indeed, rebel movements such as those led by Savimbi in Angola and Sankoh in Sierra Leone reflected this pattern in Africa. Similarly, with the emergence of multi-party politics in many parts of Africa, opposition political parties have bias around their ethnic base (Prah 2004).

More often than not, the African state has been too weak and dysfunctional to act as a neutral arbiter in  enforcing authority based on a common notion of civic citizenship. Its economic weakness and endemic lack of resources and infrastructure have eroded the capacity of the state

to exert its control and suppress any challenge to its authority, especially by identity groups in peripheral areas which tend to back rebels (Faeron & Laitin 2003:80).  A case in point is the inability of successive weak governments in the Democratic Republic of  Congo to effectively contain rebellions in parts such as the Kivu region. Cross border ethnic identities and alliances have also tended to exacerbate the problem of central authority in the periphery areas. This is typical of the Great Lakes region where neighbouring states have hosted hostile rebel groups (Mamdani 2002). Again, Nigeria is suffering the same fate from Boko Haram a terrorist group that have ravaged the state for more than a decade.

Similarly, lack of modern institutions such as constitutions or independent judiciaries have denied identity groups of credible channels through which to address their grievances and quests for equity, fairness and justice. A case in point was the Tunisian and Kenyan situations before the introduction of new constitutions. Conflicts wee rampant along ethnic and identity lines. Apart from their weakness, dysfunctionality and predatory nature,  African states have hosted existing regimes of resource-exploitation which have tended to transform identities into instruments of conflict.

Broch-Due (2005:2) rightly notes that ‘as resources dwindle and relations of wealth are reconfigured in the wake of violence, identities and ideas of belonging become the focal arenas of conflict and negotiation’.  However, poverty in itself is not a trigger of identity-based violence. Indeed, a number of poor nations in Africa have not suffered any civil war or serious challenge to the state. Africa’s army of unemployed youth have become easy recruits by rebel groups, which offer attractive promises of employment alternatives in situations of abject poverty and powerlessness, the case in point is Boko Haram militant group in Nigeria,  Al-shabab in Somalia and Al-Qaida in Syria are examples of this situation. Conversely, countries like Botswana, which have sufficient wealth, above-average income and small populations have tended to be less conflict prone.

Appadurai (1998) traced the roots of the brutal surge of ethnic violence in Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa to the uncertainties, anxieties, disillusions and chaotic environments created by economic globalisation. In this respect Africa’s civil conflicts are not only heavily dependent on local depredation, but also on global linkages and support. For example, conflicts in the Great Lakes region constitute a complex conflict with local, regional and global linkages.

Africa witnessed increasing involvement of mercenary companies in civil wars in Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo in ways that carry eerie memories of colonial pillage and violence. Widely cited is the role of two British mercenary companies, Sandline International and Executive Outcomes, which aided militias in Sierra Leone to secure access to mineral-producing areas in return for direct payments and commercial concessions (Storey 1999:39-56). Notably, the area controlled by Liberia’s warlord, Charles Taylor, in Sierra Leone and Liberia is said to have been the third largest supplier of hard wood to France in the 1990s. The lucrative commerce in timber and ‘blood diamonds’ in West African conflicts also tended to reinforce the claim that markets are capable of thriving without states at all. This view of markets in corrupt states privileges the profits of war over the human rights of the people trapped in these cycles of conflict. (Broch-Due 2005:3).

Nigeria is a plural and heterogeneous nation comprising of multi ethnic and multi religious groups. The history of the country has been replete with identity related issues and conflicts. Communities, clans and religious groups have taken up arms against one another in devastating dimensions. A case in point are the conflicts, violence and terror that have rocked the Jos Plateau in the last two decades, including the most disturbing ongoing Boko Haram. It has led to terror in the northern part of the country and it has not only threatened the nation’s security and overall corporate existence as a single indivisible entity but has exposed the fragility of the nation.

The Nigerian state has a  high level of unemployment that stood at 23 per cent  at mid 2012 and even higher among the youths with  about 38 per cent pervades the country’ s economy. Fiscal problems, debts and low economic growth also remain dominant features of the country. (Okonjo – Iweala, 2012; Adeyeye, 2011; Sani, 2011; Almond, 2008; Amuwo, 2010; Adejumobi, 2001; Ibeanu, 1999; Abdul, 2002;, 2006, Falola, 2008; and CPI, UNHDI 2011). While identity violence has tended to aid the course of globalisation in Africa in cruel ways, this linkage between localised conflict and globalisation has undermined citizenship and human rights of the African people.

In conclusion, identity and ethnic conflicts are rampant across the globe. These are caused by a variety of factors which  include poor leadership or resource allocation among different ethnic groups. These were common since time immemorial, for instance in Europe,  the dissolution of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War,  left large populations of Russian speakers in a number of new republics in the Baltics, Eastern Europe and Central Asia, many of whom became a focus for the long-standing grievances of the indigenous populations. Discrimination and conflict between Russians and local populations became a potent issue in a number of these states, with language and citizenship rights an area of particular  concern.  Again the effects of globalisation also contributed to the rise of identity conflicts as states tried to grapple with various challenges.

REFERENCES

Akpan, W. (2007). Ethnic Diversity and Conflict in Nigeria: Lessons from the Niger Delta Crisis. African Journal on Conflict Resolution 7 (2).

Annan, K. (1998). The causes of conflict and the promotion of durable peace and sustainable development in Africa: Report of the Secretary-General.

http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/sgreport/report.htm accessed 10 Aug 2006.

Anderson, R. (2004). A definition of peace. Peace and Conflict. Journal of Peace Psychology

10 (2), 101-116.

Appadurai, A. (1998). Dead certainty: Ethnic violence in the era of globalization. Public

Culture 10 (2), 225-247.

Banégas, R. (2006). Côte d’Ivoire: Patriotism, ethno-nationalism and other African modes of

self-writing. African Affairs 105 (421), 535-552

Bayart, J-F. (2005). The illusion of cultural identity. London: Hurst & Company.

Broch-Due, V. (2005). Violence and belonging: Analytical reflections, in Broch-Due, V. (ed)

(2005), Violence and belonging: the quest for identity in post-colonial Africa,1-40. London:

Routledge.

Collier, P. & Sambanis, N. (2005). Understanding civil war: Evidence and analysis. Vol. 1:

Africa. Washington: World Bank.

Eyo, D. (1999). Community, citizenship and the politics of ethnicity in post-colonial Africa,

in Kalipeni, E. & Zeleza, P. (eds), Sacred spaces and public quarrels. Trenton NJ: Africa

World Press.

Galtung, J. (1996). Peace by peaceful means: peace and conflict, development and civilization.

Oslo: International Peace Research Institute.

Horowitz, D.L. (1985). Ethnic groups in conflict. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Huntington, S.P. (1996). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York:

Simon & Schuster.

Kagwanja, P. (2001). Politics of marionettes: Extra-legal violence and the 1997 elections in

Kenya, in Rutten, M., Mazrui, A. & Grignon, F. (eds) Out for the count: The 1997 general

elections and prospects for democracy in Kenya. Kampala: Fountain Publishers.

Kagwanja, P. (2003). Globalizing Ethnicity, Localizing Citizenship: Globalization, Identity

Politics and Violence in Kenya’s Tana River Region, Africa Development 28 (1&2), 112-152.

Kaldor, M. (1999). New Wars and Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Mamdani, M. (2002). Making sense of political violence in postcolonial Africa. Identity, Culture and Politics 3 (2), 1-24.

Prah, K.K. (2004). African wars and ethnic conflicts – rebuilding failed states. Occasional Paper: Human Development Report 2004. New York: UNDP.

Prunier, G. 1997. The Rwanda crisis: History of a genocide. New York: Columbia University Press.

Tan, L. (2006). A blueprint for change: Diversity as a civic asset. Washington: Partners for Livable Communities.

Young, C. ( 2004). The End of the Post-Colonial State in Africa? Reflections on Changing African Political Dynamics. African Affairs 103, 23-49.

Zartman, I.W. (1995). Putting things back again, in Zartman, I.W. (Ed.) Collapsed states: The disintegration and restoration of legitimate authority. SAIS African Studies Series. Colorado: Lynne Rienner