Escalation and Intervention: Multilateral Security and Its Alternatives by Arthur R Day

Author:Arthur R Day [Day, Arthur R]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9780367008840
Google: 15u6xwEACAAJ
Goodreads: 52728422
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2019-07-22T00:00:00+00:00

Multilateral Management: Obstacles and Opportunities

The Ethiopia-Somalia dispute has not escalated, but rather appears to have been contained, at least in substantial measure, by the regional actors themselves. Moreover, despite the complexity of the situation and the fundamental issues involved, superpower confrontation over the Horn of Africa has not occurred. The exception is that in the context of deteriorating relationships between the United States and the Soviet Union since 1981, the Soviet presence in Ethiopia has frequently and uncritically been compared to the invasion of Afghanistan. The irony is that both the Soviet Union and the United States, on balance, appear to have acted with restraint to stabilize the Ethiopia-Somalia dispute. At the same time, under the doctrine of linkage, Soviet sins in the Horn have been taken as one additional justification for sharply reversing the US policy of detente with Moscow.

Multilateral involvement in resolving the multidimensional Ethiopia-Somalia conflict has been quiet rather than overt and highly publicized. Former United Nations Secretary General Kurt Waldheim was reported to have used the Libreville meeting of the Organization of African Unity in 1977 to seek negotiations between Somalia and Ethiopia when their border dispute heated up into open warfare. However, the very complexity, partial articulation, and interrelatedness of the issues appear to have prevented the United Nations from taking or being asked to take a more central role in managing or terminating the conflict. Somalia and Ethiopia complained about each other's behavior bitterly in the United Nations, but neither, according to the Secretary General, activated the formal mechanisms necessary to put the matter officially before the world organization.4 Formal UN intervention was also impeded, from the UN point of view, because Somalia claimed that it was not involved at least initially in what it took as a secession movement of ethnic Somalis within Ethiopia. In short, the blurred distinction between international and domestic politics in the Horn impeded direct UN involvement in ending, limiting, or mediating the border dispute.

In the years preceding Somalia's independence, UN-sponsored arbitration of the border dispute failed because of disagreement over the terms of reference. The disagreement resulted from the confused definition of the border in the first place.5 UN failure to resolve this conflict is, thus, part of an apparently declining record of successful conflict management since 1976.6

By contrast, the Organization of African Unity appears to have been a somewhat more effective venue for dealing with the Ethiopia-Somalia conflict. The Organization of African Unity's public posture, however, has contrasted with its utility as a quiet, informal venue for conflict management. The OAU has reaffirmed the applicability of its policy of eschewing border realignment to the Horn of Africa, thus favoring Ethiopia's position. The OAU has failed, however, to agree on strong conflict-management measures that in this case would give practical effect to such pronouncements. Informally and quietly, nevertheless, meetings of the OAU have provided opportunities for informal brokerage, while some OAU chairmen appear to have sought to serve as intermediaries. The OAU is, thus, given credit for helping to restrain the conflict.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.