AN EXAMINATION OF THE AFRICAN GREAT LAKES REGION (AGLR): THE RECONSTRUCTION OF UNDERDEVELOPED, WEAK, FRAGILE AND FAILED STATES

Abstract

The African Great Lakes Region (AGLR) is composed of three countries: Burundi, Rwanda and DR Congo. This region is characterised by poor governance, poor health, slow economic development, poverty and poor protection of civilians. To help solve these challenges there has been contemporary warfare initiatives such as working to empower the states, working towards improved governance and leadership and towards improving the human development index in the countries. The united Nations and African Union have had various conflict interventions to solve the challenges. However, these efforts have not resulted in much gains. The AGLR interact politically and economically which implicate on their peace, security and governance. The economic decline in these governments coupled with rebel groups and insurgencies and poverty calls for structural changes to compel good leadership.[1] This article will look at the causes of volatility in the region, and analyse why the policy objectives and strategic framework of peacekeeping by both the UN and the AU have not stabilized the region in six (6) decades. It will also suggest concrete proposals for redressing CPEs in the Heart of Africa.

Introduction

An examination of the African Great Lakes Region (AGLR) is a demonstration that “good intentions are not sufficient to buttress the reconstruction of underdeveloped, weak, fragile and failed states”. Contemporary warfare’s Complex Political Emergencies (CPEs) and Conflict Intervention by the UN and the AU in the AGLR have not resulted in much. In this context therefore, an analysis as to why the policy objectives and strategic framework of peacekeeping by both the UN and the AU have not stabilized the region in six (6) decades is necessary. It is important for civilians to play an active role in conflict resolution and management systems to be able to realize sustainable peace in the Great Lakes Region.
The three countries that make up the Africa Great Lakes Region share common borders, ethnic communities and some natural resources. Conflicts in the AGLR are interconnected because of trans-border dimensions and transnational ethnic groups that are spread in the whole region. The region is characterised by militia groups that are armed and continue to recruit soldiers amongst and children the youth to drive border conflicts and fights. These conflicts have caused loss of life, loss of property, loss of income and poor economic growth making the region to remain poor, underdeveloped, weak and with fragile states. There have been several illegal activities such as illicit trading of natural resources, proliferation of fire arms and transnational smuggling of people and goods, flow of refugees and porous boundaries which are the main underlying issues causing inequalities and grievances. They therefore drive conflicts forcing people to escape their homes hence exposed to starvation, more violence and injustice.
Conflicts may be country specific, but ethnic ties have played a significant role of spreading and escalation of conflicts in the region. For instance, Tutsi, and Hutus are diverse in the AGLR. After the Rwanda genocide in 1994, Hutus fled to Kivu in Congo where they further disrupted it for Congo was already experiencing war and tension. Hutus from Rwanda formed coalitions with Hutus in Congo against the Tutsis in DRC leading to creation of armed groups in Congo for defence.[2] There have been challenges in distribution of resources to all ethnic groups in the states as witnessed in their policies. Conflicts have taken over policies and weakened them and not able to assure security of citizens adequately.[3] The following section expounds on why the AGLR is underdeveloped, with weak and fragile states even after many years of AU and the UN working to restore peace and other stakeholders supporting with humanitarian work and economic development.

A Social Approach to Conflict Analysis

This paper employs a social approach to conflict analysis where it delves in to several forms of social and political unrest in the AGLR. With the timelines of 1798-1857, the social theory was founded by Auguste Comte. The prominent proponents of social theory are Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault Pierre Bourdieu and Jürgen Habermas. The theory explains how the societies in Africa changed and evolved by explaining their social behaviour, power, gender, structure ethnicity and utopias.[4] This theory will be applied in analysing the conflict events in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo including communal violence, protests, coups, war and all forms of political social and economic unrest experienced in these countries.

Why is the Africa great lakes region underdeveloped, weak, fragile and failed states?

The AGLR experiences conflicts that are dynamic and complex.[5] These conflicts are related to governance issues, exploitation, accessibility of natural resources by all, structural violence, and identity division. The governments of the countries in question have been unable to deal with the diverse ethnicity of their societies through ensuring well distributed and accessibility of natural resources, political inclusion, access to the rule of law which creates the conflicts while the social and political elites take advantage of the situation to play ethnicity and prevailing stereotypes.

Ethnicity

Ethnicity is one of the strong drivers of conflicts in the AGLR.[6] The Region has a diversity of ethnic groups in the specific countries which has been the main driver and trigger of the conflicts. Multi-ethnic groups as diverse as they are, can prosper. Ethnic diversity is not a cause of and its absence is not an indicator of peace. Nevertheless, conflicts in the AGLR Are motivated by the ideology of ethnicity that is driven by the political leaders pursuing their own interests. For instance, in Rwanda, Uganda and D R Congo, Hutus and Tutsi are not confined by political boundaries.[7] But once a conflict erupts in these three countries, politicians and elites exploit, insight and manipulate these ethnics based on their interests regardless of the countries and borders.

Land Issues

Land Access and land use have triggered a significant number of conflicts in the AGLR. For instance, in Rwanda, the organisers of genocide exploited poverty and unequal access to land. In Rwanda, land has limited access because it is not equally distributed. Additionally, there is an history of population displacements with redistribution of land by the state triggering structural conflicts which ideally creates social tension, deprivation and economic domination, paving a way for violence.[8] In Rwanda, 80% of the disputes at the district level are about land. 10. Land disputes in Rwanda hinder sustainable peace.[9]
In Burundi, land access has caused conflicts, contributed to poverty and grievances amongst the elite. Return of refugees in 1993 contributed to more land disputes and political unrest which caused coup d’état and killing of president by then. Burundi is not well prepared to receive returning refugees because they don’t have adequate institutions to address land disputes.[10] In DRC, there is insufficient access to land which has impoverished rural people and a recipe for conflicts. Additionally, the Ituri territory continues with the expansion of ranching and agricultural land which is a proximate cause of violence. The current conflict in DR Congo has changed land access through forced displacement which has further changed the traditional leadership. Conflict by itself is a recipe for land competition and disputes.[11]

Conflicts over exploitation of natural resources

There have been several studies on the naturals resource exploitation in the AGLR. The region experiences two types of conflicts related to natural resources. The first one is conflict by two countries that are fighting of a resource in a shared border. The second type illegal extraction of natural resources and using the money to fund illegal activities such as terrorism. In the second type, natural resources are a source of revenue, triggering proliferation of small arms, enhancing smuggling networks and causing more violent conflicts. In the exploitation of natural resources at the AGLR, there is multiplicity of actors, governance challenges, poor infrastructure, poor enforcement of policies, an informal mining industry, armed groups controlling the mines, to overtake exploitation of the resources to finance their conflicts. There is a lot of illegal trade, smuggling of goods, armed groups and inter-state conflicts. Therefore, natural resources in the region have been termed as a curse and not a blessing.

Forced migration and upsurge of refugees

The great lakes region experiences forced migration flows. During a given time or another, these countries have received refugees from the other. Burundi has hosted refugees from Rwanda and Congo, Rwanda has hosted refugees from Burundi and Congo while DR Congo has hosted refugees from Rwanda and Burundi. The conflicts experienced by these refugees have a strong ethnic background. Spread of same ethnics in these countries fuelled more conflicts across the borders. These refugees pose competition over resources, land and jobs in the host country or end up joining the rebel groups and mobilising for operations against the enemy in their country. For instance, Rwandese refugees cross with fire arms to Congo where they formed a militia group known as the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). The activities of this group are a source of conflicts experienced in DRC.

Poor leadership and governance

Leadership, governance and democracy are part of the causes of volatility in the AGLR. There has been a lot of paradox of democracy during elections in the region which has triggered violence. However, history has shown that it is difficult to achieve democracy without conflicts. The process of attaining democracy in the region has been characterised by conflicts and difficulties. For close to six decades now, the region has tried to practice oligarchy as they implement democracy and good governance. This has been attained through freedom of speech, transparent and fair elections, multiparty, right to demonstrate, and accountability. The AGLR needs to move from dictatorship way of leadership and focus on building national unity peace and simple democracies. It is believed that since democracy and multiparty was introduced in the region in 1990s, it has led to tensions and heightened grievances, social injustices and ethnicity that has resulted in to violence and conflict in the region.[12]
Based on socio-political dynamics, political leaders at the AGLR know that universal democracy is responsible for violence and conflicts. The leaders restrict some democracy rights of citizens e.g. denial to freedom of speech, free engagement in political activities. They denial these rights claiming that they hurt national security and peace. Additionally, the leaders have an history of changing the constitution to remove the things they think restrict them.[13] Changing the constitution also gives them the opportunity to remain in power and sustain their security, protect their looted property and enjoy political mandates. The constitution is changed through referendum where people are encouraged to vote in favour of the changes of the constitution.
More causes of conflicts are economic mismanagement, weak governance as evidenced from debt burdens, un-popular macroeconomic polies, unaccountable security sector, factors that have led to collapsing of social services.

Contemporary warfare’s complex political emergencies (CPES) and conflict intervention by the United Nations (UN) and African Union (AU) in the AGLR

The United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU) have long been engaged in building peace and stability Africa Great lakes region. This is because the region has been challenged with armed conflicts, political instability and tensions over natural resources. There have been efforts by UN and AU to end these challenges. On 24th Fe 2013, there was adoption of United Nations-brokered accord to end the cycles of conflicts in DR Congo and the AGLR. The peace, security and cooperation framework was signed 13 countries. The agreement has commitments towards addressing causes of conflicts and the recycling violence and suffering in the AGLR. The implementation of this agreement is led by the office of the secretary general at AGLR. Through this agreement, DR Congo held peaceful elections in 2018 and president Tshekedi promised to restore peace and security in DRC. Other leaders in the region have taken steps to address political tensions, advance security and economic cooperation. This has contributed to reinvigoration of multi-diplomacy and improvement in security.[14]
In October 2020, the UN Secretary general approved the UN Strategy for Peace Consolidation, Conflict prevention and resolution in AGLR. The strategy proposes to leverage on the expertise of UN to help the AGLR to achieve sustainable peace and security to pave way for development. The international community and finance institutions were urged to contribute to give financial support towards implementation of the strategy.[15] However these achievements are fragile and there is need to capitalize on presented opportunities and not relent support to the governments so that they live up as per their responsibilities.[16]
The Peace Security and Cooperation Framework is a relevant commitment by the AGRL countries because it defines the guidelines that will enable them to cooperate on causes of conflict in the AGLR. Recently the countries leadership demonstrated cooperation during the regional oversight mechanism of the PSC in addressing challenging of implementing the framework. The question of disarmament was well discussed.
According to the former UN special envoy to the AGLR, the biggest source of insecurity in the region was the armed illicit groups in DRC and the proxy that support their illegal activities and the fact that they can access natural resources. The UN special envoy further insinuated that DRC was indispensable for regional security. DRC is the biggest country at the AGLR, and is endowed with natural resources that if well utilized, in a legal way could be the engine for economic development at AGLR. Conversely, there has been shocks to economic activities, conflicts and insecurity that create ripple effects. Insecurity in eastern DRC has perpetuated mistrust in the region fueling cycles of insecurity.[17] The situation in DRC seems to be improving, albeit small. Since president Tshikedi assumed the office, he has visited neighboring countries lobbying for support. He also released political prisoners as per the 31st Dec 2016 Agreement in efforts to reconcile sons and daughters of DRC.[18] There is need for joined efforts by DRC community and internal community to address the security challenges faced in the country.
Despite the efforts by the mediation talks by the East African Community (EAC), Burundi’s situation is still an issue of concern. There are still political and economic differences by the government and the opposers and the way of conducting their elections in 2020. The EAC should use their tools and power at their disposal for more mediation talks. The regional economic integration of EAC may not yield results if Burundi does not create an enabling environment for the EAC members to trade towards economic growth.
During Burundi’s 2020 elections, there were serious allegations of abuse by the government to the opposition. There is still no respect of human rights while the political space seems to be not opened. The AGLR countries have membership in other regional economic blocs, but the only body that has the core AGLR countries is the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region. Which has remained weak and not able to ring mediation and sustainable peace for the region. The AU and the UN have also not managed to bring sustainable peace and the region remains fragmented and weak with no voice. The lack of political will and a strong body to unify the region are partly to blame. The regional security related mechanisms lack the ability to discharge their mandate. The member states do not contribute financially and technically and offer political will towards the dispensation of these mandates. AU continues to offer support but it is overwhelmed by the challenges experienced in the region.
The challenges experienced in the AGLR are different and unique because they lack a strong body to support them. The history of the region in terms of politics and leadership further heightens its peculiarity and has made it difficult for external parties to come in and support. It is therefore paramount to strengthen relations of the countries to overcome mistrust and achieve sustainable peace and security. The leaders need to be strongly committed in building the peace and overcoming conflict and violence. The AU guarantees implementation of the PSC framework and very key in maintaining peace and security in the AGLR. The AU should therefore work on their structures to enhance their efforts in supporting the regional community that address the challenges of insecurity in Africa.[19]
All the organizations working in the AGLR have a mission to promote peace, and fight poverty. This ranges from good governance, good health, protection of civilians and economic development. There have been several peace agreements signed which and not yet yield results in terms of ending hostilities and building peace. Switzerland has been working in the region to consolidate peace, prevent violence enhance economic development and fight impunity. Switzerland and AU support with monitoring election processes, constitutional reforms and defending human rights. These institutions promote dialogues with the leaders and the population so that there is public participation and inclusivity in decision making processes. Organizations such as Switzerland go ahead to provide humanitarian support by distributing good s and services to those affected by the conflicts. This humanitarian work is currently concentrated in Burundi and DR Congo.[20]
The organizations have supported with access to quality health care for the populations, which reduces tension and promotes social cohesion. They work to improve reproductive and maternal healthcare as they fight against chronic malnutrition. Those with psychological issues are supported as well. The organizations try to end violence against women by supporting organizations to empower women and defend their rights as they educate the population.[21]
There is need to promote employment and economic development through income opportunities, vocational education and training in marketable occupational sectors. There is also focus in promoting private public partnerships. The sectors that work in production of good and services are empowered with good governance.[22]

Concrete proposals for redressing complex political emergencies (CPES) in the AGLR of Africa

The longstanding and continuing conflicts in Burundi, Rwanda and DR Congo are Complex Political Emergencies with multiple players and origins. In Burundi, the political persecution and insecurity led to international displacement with over 300,000 refugees fleeing to the neighbouring Rwanda, DR Congo, Kenya and South Sudan.[23] In Rwanda CPEs resulted in to genocide, displacement and refugees that fled to the neighbouring countries. Today, DR Congo is still experiencing conflicts part of which is blamed to the massive refugee crisis that resulted from the Rwanda genocide in 1994. The conflicts, political up heal and instability in Congo has led to deaths, humanitarian crisis and displacements. Even after the end of the civil war in 2003, these challenges have not changed in Congo. Similarly, all the countries the AGLR continue to grieve from the consequences of their wars and political instability as evidenced from their poor governance and weak states that are underdeveloped and fragile.
In dealing with the CPEs in the AGLR, it is first important to get to know the nature of a state and its role and the processes that led to collapsing of a state for one to understand political emergencies (CPEs). CPEs are deep-rooted in state collapse where humanitarian support is executed within fractured on non-existence state. Large scale conflicts are changing from wars to CPEs. Social and cultural theory can better analyse the current situations and relating conflicts with development and pointing to the outcomes of conflicts.
Violence and conflicts have caused forced migration of civilians while others have been internally displaced from their homes.[24] Change in the nature of conflicts to the contemporary conflicts needs an understanding. Initially, analysis of war was based on who would win or lose, and was between states and military capacities. Today, we have social and cultural analysis that looks at the complexity and feasibility of the prediction. It is important to highlight peace and conflicts in the discourse of social and economic development. These are frameworks that help us to understand that external interventions build local capacities increasing probability of peace, but not quite sustainably.
Every conflict is unique and as such, there are different approaches that are used towards understanding CPEs. According to Richards, every conflict needs regained analysis to explain it.[25] International relations approaches in conflict analysis emphasize on global and macro-level factors while ignoring community experience in the process and events unfolding at regional and national levels. This approach only considers decision making by leaders, ignoring community processes in violence and conflict processes. When analysing war, there is need for ne-grained approaches because conflicts are varied and specific. There is need to do detailed analysis of local dynamic s for CPEs in understanding how violence occurred.[26]
In the contemporary world, the community are the nexus of conflict action – physical violence and suffering occur at the community level. Today’s battles end up in the villages and cities but not in the field. Conflict entrepreneurs are working to understand community dynamics to gain knowledge in achieving their objectives. Therefore, peacebuilders should compete with conflict entrepreneurs in designing new ways of peace building at the community level and understanding their essentials of operating. Integrating both micro-and macro-level dimensions in conflict analysis is key.
Conflict itself is a social process with structural tensions that disrupt CPEs. The AGLR is a good example of how conflicts can mutate. The contention of war brings about many other contentions.[27] When violence ends, there is need to more efforts in peacebuilding to reduce the likelihood of violence occurring. The nature of conflicts is that there are timelines and regions stability and instability while the boundaries remain forever unchanged. The organizations undertaking peacebuilding should therefore understand these underlying dynamics of conflict – Conflict have critical thresholds that they need to respond to with alternative options.
Some of the peace building initiatives may include opportunities in building peace and degeneration of renewed hostilities. The peace builders need to identify the stabilising points of conflicts in relation to the surrounding conditions.[28] In social relations approach, we ned to consider the sociological sense of conflict. Social identity and social order provide a ground for political forces to grow. The meanings attributed to social events are important as phenomena.[29] Other wars such as the Sierra Leone war was fought with local and cultural resources and therefore a cultural approach is important in analysing the war. In analysing war and CPEs, we need to consider gender, ethnicity, religion, age and kinship.

Civilians’ active role in conflict resolution and management systems: Gendered approach

Gender is a socially constructed term to refer to the characteristics of men, women, boys and girls. These characteristics could be in form of norms, roles, behaviours and relationship within the gender aspects. Different societies view gender differently and this can change over time.[30] Due to its hierarchical nature, gender produces inequalities that further cause more social and economic inequalities. For instance, gender-based discrimination intersects with ethnicity, disability, age, geographic location sexual orientation and socioeconomic status. There is therefore intersectionality in gender.
Gender is different from sex because sex refers to biological and physiological characteristics of people based on chromosomes, hormones and reproductive organs. Gender identity of people is the deeply felt and internal experiences of individuals which may also correspond to their sex.[31] Gender influences peoples experience in war, conflict resolution and management. Gender may limit one to participate in conflict resolution and management.

Gender and Conflicts

Gender intersects with many other aspects of social cleavage e.g. race, ethnicity, class, and geographical location in determining the actors in in conflicts. Gender relations are so important in in analyzing conflict in the development study dimensions. Women have been rarely mentioned in conflict study analysis marking the absence of gender. Gender analysis was introduced by Byrne[32] and other scholars recently. Their illustrations show different ways in which women and men struggle over power and resources and how gender relations can be interfered with by conflicts. The economic roles of men and women in CPEs have been changed by the nature of the emerging issues.
In analyzing gender and conflicts, it is of essence to note that gender relations rarely cause violent social conflict while gender injustices against men and women can catalyse conflicts. Gender -based injustices such as rape and use of sexual violence have been used in prosecuting war as observed in Rwanda, Burundi, DRC and Sudan. Conflicts have triggers and manifestations that have different causes. Treatment of women during wars may not be the root cause of the conflict but may attract international attention.
According to UN Women, women have a transformative role in ending conflicts, mobilizing for peace and social reconciliations. Women may be accustomed political leadership roles in the community when men leave to fight. Part of the political gains made in wartime should be maintained after war to avoid unequal gender relations.[33]
In many countries, men are nurtured as warriors while women should be supportive wives and mothers. In countries such as Sri Lanka and South Africa, they have developed female fighters and suicide bombers and women are deployed for peace building in conflict areas. In understanding CPEs, there has been a push to understand the roles of women in conflicts. Women are seen as victims of conflicts, but they are also active agents. Women have been effective violence perpetrators as well as role models and team leaders in initiatives that promote peace.[34] In a gender-based categorization in conflict resolution study, Sheryl Brahnam found out that women applied collaborative conflict resolution while men avoided conflict. Therefore, women possess more effective conflict resolution qualities than male counterparts.[35] Gender may influence help predicting styles to be applied in conflict resolution. It has been found out that women labour to build relationships over agenda than men do during times of conflicts. These findings contradict Braham’s findings. Other studies show that women tend to be competing than men who are avoidant. Therefore, gender-partnered responses in conflict have not been consistent.[36]

Conclusion

This paper has examined the challenges and the reasons for under developed, weak and fragile states of the AGLR. The challenges outlined in the essay are poor leadership and governance, illegal exploitation and unequal access to natural resources, land rights, land access and ethnicity, transboundary smuggling, illicit trade and proliferation of fire arms. This has caused a vicious cycle of violence and conflict in the region. In addressing these challenges, the United Nations and African Union have been key in designing of policy objectives and strategic frameworks to guide in peace keeping and peace building as well as facilitation of these processes. Additionally, there have been other stakeholders that labor to support with policies in transnational trade and migration. Besides the efforts and involvement of these stakeholders, there no sustainable solution in addressing these challenges.
The study appreciates that there are different approaches in analyzing conflict depending on the root cause, where it happens and who is involve. The study uses the social approach to explain that in analyzing conflicts, it is important to consider the communities, nation and international interactions-macro and micro levels of conflicts. This better informs the CPEs to be adopted in the context of the war.
The researcher proposes for reconstituting community structures, enhancing economic development initiatives, and preaching peace amongst the community and ethnic members in redressing the complex political emergencies experienced in the AGLR.
In the gender lens, the study has found out that both men and women can be involved differently in conflicts. Depending on different findings by different scholars, there is no agreement on whether men or women are better in handling conflicts but women have been termed as better leaders in post conflict situations and helping in bringing the community together. The paper proposes more study in understanding the role of gender in conflict analyses.

References

Adams, Mark, and Mark Bradbury. Conflict and development: organisational adaptation in conflict situations. Oxfam GB, 2001.
Amici, R. “Conflict Resolution in the Great Lakes Region.” In Conference Report. London: The Council of the Democratic Federal Republic of Congo. 1999.
Brahnam, Sheryl D., Thomas M. Margavio, Michael A. Hignite, Tonya B. Barrier, and Jerry M. Chin. “A gender‐based categorization for conflict resolution.” Journal of management development (2005).
Bryant, M. “UNHCR, The State of the World’s Refugees: A Humanitarian Agenda.” International Journal of Refugee Law 10, No. 1 (1998): 311-313.
Byrne, Bridget. “Towards a gendered understanding of conflict.” Ids bulletin 27, no. 3 (1996): 31-40.
Cliffe, Lionel, and Robin Luckham. “Complex Political Emergencies and the State: Failure and the Fate of the State.” Third World Quarterly 20, no. 1 (1999): 27–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3993181.
De Lame, Danielle. “Une colline entre mille ou le calme avant la tempête.” Transformations et Blocages du Rwanda Rural, Musée Royale de l’Afrique Centrale, Tervuren (1996).
Goodhand, Jonathan. “From holy war to opium war? A case study of the opium economy in North Eastern Afghanistan.” Central Asian Survey 19, no. 2 (2000): 265-280.
Harrington, Austin. Modern social theory. oxford: oxford University Press, 2005.
Huggins, Chris, Herman Musahara, Prisca Mabura Kamungi, Johnstone Summit Oketch, and Koen Vlassenroot. “Conflict in the Great Lakes Region–How is it linked with land and migration?” ODI: Natural Resource Perspectives 96, no. 1 (2005): 1-4.
Khadiagala, Gilbert M., ed. Security dynamics in Africa’s Great Lakes region. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006.
Le Billon, Philippe. “The political ecology of war: natural resources and armed conflicts.” Political geography 20, no. 5 (2001): 561-584.
Mansfield, Edward D., and Jack Snyder. Electing to fight: Why emerging democracies go to war. mit Press, 2007.
Oxford Analytica. “A prisoner release in Burundi offers only a respite.” Emerald Expert Briefings oxan-es (2017).
Richards, Paul. Fighting for the rain forest: war, youth & resources in Sierra Leone. No. Reprinted Ed. James Currey Ltd., 1998.
Smillie, Ian. “NGOs in complex emergencies: the case of Sierra Leone.” Working paper/CARE Canada; no. 1 (1996).
Steen, Aaron, and Kanade Shinkai. “Understanding individual and gender differences in conflict resolution: A critical leadership skill.” International journal of women’s dermatology 6, no. 1 (2020): 50-53.
Tull, Denis M., and Claudia Simons. “The institutionalisation of power revisited: presidential term limits in Africa.” Africa Spectrum 52, no. 2 (2017): 79-102.
Uvin, Peter. Aiding violence: The development enterprise in Rwanda. Kumarian Press, 1998.
Uphoff, Norman. “Learning from Gal Oya-Possibilities for participatory development and post-Newtonian social science.” (1996): 103-107.
UN Women. Gender and Conflict Analaysis. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2012/10/WPSsourcebook-04A-GenderConflictAnalysis-en.pdf
Van Leeuwen, Mathijs. “Imagining the Great Lakes Region: discourses and practices of civil society regional approaches for peacebuilding in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 46, no. 3 (2008): 393-426.
Waal, Alex de. “Contemporary warfare in Africa: changing context, changing strategies.” IDS Bulletin 27, no. 3 (1996): 6-16. pnmkknnn
Weiss, Herbert F. War and Peace in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Nordic Africa Institute, 2000. Current African Issues, 22.
Wimmer, Andreas. “Who owns the state? Understanding ethnic conflict in post‐colonial societies.” Nations and nationalism 3, no. 4 (1997): 631-666.
https://reliefweb.int/report/central-african-republic/psc-report-interview-au-s-voice-great-lakes-remains-key#:~:text=As%20a%20co%2Dguarantor%20of,on%20core%20issues%20of%20concern.
https://www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/countries/great-lakes-region.html
https://www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/countries/great-lakes-region.html|
https://dppa.un.org/en/mission/special-envoy-great-lakes-region
https://reliefweb.int/report/central-african-republic/psc-report-interview-au-s-voice-great-lakes-remains-key
[1] Waal, Alex de. “Contemporary warfare in Africa: changing context, changing strategies.” IDS Bulletin 27, no. 3 (1996): 6-16. pnmkknnn
[2] Weiss, Herbert F. War and Peace in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Nordic Africa Institute, 2000. Current African Issues, 22.
[3] Van Leeuwen, Mathijs. “Imagining the Great Lakes Region: discourses and practices of civil society regional approaches for peacebuilding in Rwanda, Burundi and DR Congo.” The Journal of Modern African Studies 46, no. 3 (2008): 393-426.
[4] Harrington, Austin. Modern social theory. oxford: oxford University Press, 2005.
[5] Khadiagala, Gilbert M., ed. Security dynamics in Africa’s Great Lakes region. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006.
[6] Wimmer, Andreas. “Who owns the state? Understanding ethnic conflict in post‐colonial societies.” Nations and nationalism 3, no. 4 (1997): 631-666.
[7] Amici, R. “Conflict Resolution in the Great Lakes Region.” In Conference Report. London: The Council of the Democratic Federal Republic of Congo. 1999.
[8] Uvin, Peter. Aiding violence: The development enterprise in Rwanda. Kumarian Press, 1998.
[9] De Lame, Danielle. “Une colline entre mille ou le calme avant la tempête.” Transformations et Blocages du Rwanda Rural, Musée Royale de l’Afrique Centrale, Tervuren (1996).
[10] Huggins, Chris, Herman Musahara, Prisca Mabura Kamungi, Johnstone Summit Oketch, and Koen Vlassenroot. “Conflict in the Great Lakes Region–How is it linked with land and migration?” ODI: Natural Resource Perspectives 96, no. 1 (2005): 1-4.
[11] Le Billon, Philippe. “The political ecology of war: natural resources and armed conflicts.” Political geography 20, no. 5 (2001): 561-584.
[12] Mansfield, Edward D., and Jack Snyder. Electing to fight: Why emerging democracies go to war. mit Press, 2007.
[13] Tull, Denis M., and Claudia Simons. “The institutionalisation of power revisited: presidential term limits in Africa.” Africa Spectrum 52, no. 2 (2017): 79-102.
[14] https://dppa.un.org/en/mission/special-envoy-great-lakes-region
[15] ibid
[16] https://reliefweb.int/report/central-african-republic/psc-report-interview-au-s-voice-great-lakes-remains-key
[17] Ibid
[18] Oxford Analytica. “A prisoner release in Burundi offers only a respite.” Emerald Expert Briefings oxan-es (2017).
[19] https://reliefweb.int/report/central-african-republic/psc-report-interview-au-s-voice-great-lakes-remains-key#:~:text=As%20a%20co%2Dguarantor%20of,on%20core%20issues%20of%20concern.
[20] https://www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/countries/great-lakes-region.html
[21] Ibid
[22] https://www.eda.admin.ch/deza/en/home/countries/great-lakes-region.html|
[23] Cliffe, Lionel, and Robin Luckham. “Complex Political Emergencies and the State: Failure and the Fate of the State.” Third World Quarterly 20, no. 1 (1999): 27–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3993181.
[24] Bryant, M. “UNHCR, The State of the World’s Refugees: A Humanitarian Agenda.” International Journal of Refugee Law 10, No. 1 (1998): 311-313.
[25] Richards, Paul. Fighting for the rain forest: war, youth & resources in Sierra Leone. No. Reprinted Ed. James Currey Ltd., 1998.
[26] Waal, Alex de. “Contemporary warfare in Africa: changing context, changing strategies.” IDS Bulletin 27, no. 3 (1996): 6-16.
[27] Goodhand, Jonathan. “From holy war to opium war? A case study of the opium economy in North Eastern Afghanistan.” Central Asian Survey 19, no. 2 (2000): 265-280.
[28] Adams, Mark, and Mark Bradbury. Conflict and development: organisational adaptation in conflict situations. Oxfam GB, 2001.
[29] Uphoff, Norman. “Learning from Gal Oya-Possibilities for participatory development and post-Newtonian social science.” (1996): 103-107.
[30] WHO. Gender and Heath. Accessed on 10th Jan 2023 from https://www.who.int/health-topics/gender#tab=tab_1
[31] What iss gender? What is sex? Accessed on 10th Jan 2023 from https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48642.html
[32] Byrne, Bridget. “Towards a gendered understanding of conflict.” Ids bulletin 27, no. 3 (1996): 31-40.
[33] UN Women. Gender and Conflict Analaysis. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2012/10/WPSsourcebook-04A-GenderConflictAnalysis-en.pdf
[34] Smillie, Ian. “NGOs in complex emergencies: the case of Sierra Leone.” Working paper/CARE Canada; no. 1 (1996).
[35] Brahnam, Sheryl D., Thomas M. Margavio, Michael A. Hignite, Tonya B. Barrier, and Jerry M. Chin. “A gender‐based categorization for conflict resolution.” Journal of management development (2005).
[36] Steen, Aaron, and Kanade Shinkai. “Understanding individual and gender differences in conflict resolution: A critical leadership skill.” International journal of women’s dermatology 6, no. 1 (2020): 50-53.