Previous page | New search |
The free AfricaBib App for Android is available here
Periodical article | Leiden University catalogue | WorldCat |
Title: | Eliciting Compliance from Warlords: The ECOWAS Experience in Liberia, 1990-1997 |
Author: | Aning, Emmanuel K. |
Year: | 1999 |
Periodical: | Review of African Political Economy |
Volume: | 26 |
Issue: | 81 |
Period: | September |
Pages: | 335-348 |
Language: | English |
Geographic term: | Liberia |
Subjects: | civil wars military intervention ECOWAS Inter-African Relations Politics and Government Military, Defense and Arms |
External links: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03056249908704397 http://ejournals.ebsco.com/direct.asp?ArticleID=4038AB2BB82214685A81 |
Abstract: | Contrary to the United Nations and the international community generally, ECOWAS perceived the civil war in Liberia as presenting a concrete threat to its member States and international stability and security. This article tells the story of the successful military intervention by ECOWAS in Liberia in the years 1990-1996. It provides the background to the conflict, discussing the increasing role of non-State actors and the interests of faction groups and focussing on the relative success and innovation with which these groups exploited natural resources and negotiated economic deals. The civil war in Liberia did not fit the Clausewitzian tenets of war as a continuation of diplomacy by other means, hence ECOWAS had to find specific means to elicit compliance with disarmament agreements and accords from the Liberian warlords. ECOWAS's peace efforts included the imposition of arms embargoes; a weapons buy-back programme; the disarming of private and irregular units; and the disarming of combatants. Despite the initial weaknesses in ECOWAS's demilitarization endeavours, almost a third of all combatants were disarmed. It can be argued, however, that limited and and unfinished disarmament initiatives can have destabilizing consequences not only for Nigeria, but for the region as a whole. Most faction groups resisted compliance commitments also because of scepticism concerning compliance levels from other signatories. Bibliogr., sum. |