Complexities of international mediation at sub-regional levels in Africa: lessons from South Sudan

What is it about?

IGAD’s action or lack of it thereof, failure or success, are largely determined by the prevailing regional politics and the role of the leaders of its front-line member states. Regional leaders have equally demonstrated their preference of IGAD over the AU and the UN due to their perceived interest in keeping regional peace and security issues under their control. This is partly, because regional leaders know that they have a level of leverage over IGAD which they may not have over the AU and other global actors, such as the UN. In view of the foregoing, operationalization of the APSA framework, will largely depend on a pragmatic collaborative framework between the two levels, particularly benefitting from the role of the Panel of the Wise (PoW).

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Operating at the confluence of theory and practice, my study uses the case of IGAD mediation in South Sudan, presented through accessible language, to explore and highlight the agonistic space that Regional Economic Communities (RECs) provide. Through this agonistic space, I shed light on the complexity of regional conflict management whilst suggesting practical approaches to navigating regional entanglements for pragmatic and impactful peace processes and outcomes. This is particularly useful in ideas on operationalization of the Africa Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) and pursuit of African solutions to African problems through the agency of African RECs, such as IGAD.

Perspectives