The Strategic Utility of African International Organizations in the Pursuit of National Security Interests in West Africa and the Greater Horn
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Multilateral Machinations: The Strategic Utility of African International Organizations in the Pursuit of National Security Interests in West Africa and the Greater Horn The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Warner, Jason. 2016. Multilateral Machinations: The Strategic Utility of African International Organizations in the Pursuit of National Security Interests in West Africa and the Greater Horn. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Graduate School of Arts & Sciences. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33493328 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Multilateral Machinations: The Strategic Utility of African International Organizations in the Pursuit of National Security Interests in West Africa and the Greater Horn A dissertation presented by Jason Scott Warner to The Department of African and African American Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of African Studies Harvard University Cambridge, Massachusetts April 2016 © 2016 Jason Warner All rights reserved. ! Advisor: Robert H. Bates Jason Warner Multilateral Machinations: The Strategic Utility of African International Organizations in the Pursuit of National Security Interests in West Africa and the Greater Horn ABSTRACT Since the end of decolonization, African states have created a series of dense and overlapping international organizations (IOs) at both the continental (Organization of African Unity/African Union) and sub-regional (regional economic community, REC) levels of analysis, both of which broadly claim to fulfill similar mandates on a range of issues, including the provision of collective security. Given that every African state is embedded within at least two African IOs with similar mandates – which have generally been assumed to be important primarily for the accomplishment of collective goals – how, when, and why do individual African states understand when such IOs might be strategically useful for the pursuit of their individual security and foreign policy aims, especially as relates to national security interests? To answer this question, this dissertation creates a theory of how African states understand the strategic utility of African IOs in relation to the pursuits of their national security interests, which it tests against the historical record of actual state behavior in eight countries in a combination of West Africa and the Greater Horn. Ultimately, it shows that with the knowledge of four variables – a state’s international power projection capability; its location within regional and continental IO polarities; and the nature of the national security interest at hand – one can broadly predict when, why, and in which African IOs states will pursue their individual national security interests. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS INTRODUCTION SECTION ONE: BACKGROUND AND THEORY Chapter One: International Relations, Foreign Policy Analysis and Africa: Evolutions, Divergences, and Reconciliations Chapter Two: International Organizations in Africa Chapter Three: A Theory of African Perceptions of the Strategic Utility of African IOs SECTION TWO: POWERFUL STATES AND NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS IN AFRICAN IOS Chapter Four: Nigeria SECTION THREE: MIDDLES STATES AND NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS IN AFRICAN IOS Chapter Five: Ethiopia Chapter Six: Sudan Chapter Seven: Senegal SECTION FOUR: WEAK STATES AND NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS IN AFRICAN IOS Chapter Eight: Benin Chapter Nine: Gambia Chapter Ten: Djibouti Chapter Eleven: Eritrea SECTION FIVE: PERIPHERAL STATES AND NATIONAL SECURITY INTERESTS IN AFRICAN IOS CONCLUSION WORKS CITED iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The following work has been a project that has been pursued with interest and passion for the better part of the last eight years. While admonishments have been offered to “pick a topic that you love, because you’ll eventually hate it,” I have never once experienced anything but sincere pleasure and satisfaction in the crafting of this work. As I reach its conclusion, I am left realizing that what I have produced is the book that I myself have always hoped existed, and myself wanted to read. For that, I am proud. And yet, in recognizing my optimistic contributions to understanding contemporary African statecraft, foreign policy, international relations, and security calculations, I also recognize - and wholeheartedly admit - the limitations, inconsistencies, and necessary future avenues of research inherent within the forthcoming work. While this project comes to a conclusion, the horizons for expanded and more focused research in future endeavors seem now clearer than ever. I am thankful to all of the following for their guidance, support, friendship, intellectual engagement, and critiques as this project has developed. Having been broadly engaged in attempting to answer the forgoing questions - in some form or fashion - since approximately 2002, I have incurred sundry personal and intellectual debts to various colleagues, mentors, and friends spanning institutions, disciplines, and time periods. At my undergraduate institution, UNC-Chapel Hill, I remain eternally indebted to my mentor of the past decade, Eunice Sahle, as well as to her colleagues that have profoundly influenced my thinking on African affairs, including Barbara Anderson, Emily Burrill, Mike Lambert, Margaret Lee, Georges Nzongola- Ntalaja, and Julius Nyang’oro. At my M.A. institution, Yale, numerous professors have v had indelible impacts on me. First and foremost in this list is the late William J. Foltz, who was not only a luminary in the study of African international relations, but an outstanding example of the possibilities of engaging across academia and government service. Moreover, Oluseye Adesola, Ann Biersteker, Kamari Clarke, Nuno Monteiro, Leslye Obiora, and David J. Simon have been influential, supportive, kind, and brilliant. At the current juncture, I am frankly astounded by the quality of the committee at Harvard that I have been able to assemble to support and critique this work. Robert Bates and Timothy Shaw have long-served as luminaries in the field of African studies, while my familiarity with and admiration of Iain Johnston’s work has come about more recently, though remains profound. Finally, as a scholar and diplomat intimately familiar with the issues incumbent in this dissertation, Ambassador Reuben Brigety II is an important, worthwhile, and much valued latecomer to this group. At Harvard, I have also benefited from a tremendous diversity of knowledge from professors and colleagues, spanning both the Departments of African and African American Studies (AAAS) and Government. In addition to those mentioned, I have learned a tremendous amount from Beth Simmons, Jorge Dominguez, Tommie Shelby, Jacob Olupona, John Mugane, Peter Genschel, and Erez Manela. Colleagues in both departments have been invaluable. Among them are Warrick Moses, Kai Thaler, Cat Kelly, Funlayo Wood, Kyrah Daniels, Khytie Brown, Chambi Chachage, Sarah Lockwood, Kevin Tervala, Peter Volberding, Shelby Grossman, Gabrielle Ramaiah, Ranjit Lall, and Brett Carter. Much of this work would have been impossible without support from numerous institutions spanning academia and government. Among others, I am grateful for support from Harvard’s Weatherhead Center for International Affairs; the Harvard Program on Global Society and Security; and the U.S. Government’s Boren National Security vi Fellowship, all of which have contributed funds to my field research in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Numerous offices within the U.S. Government have also been imperative. I remain indebted to the U.S. Army’s Foreign Military Office, and especially its director, Col. Thomas Wilhelm, and my other Africanist colleague and mentor, LTC Robert Feldman. Moreover, the U.S. Embassy in Addis Ababa and the U.S. Mission to the African Union have proven an utterly invaluable resource over the course of three trips to Addis Ababa and the African Union over the past four years. Notable personnel have included Ambassador Brigety, and his colleagues Arlene Ferill, Janelle Cunningham, Col. Laura Varhola and her husband Chris, David Kennedy and Learned Dees. Across other institutions, I am invaluable for conversations with Dianna English, David Baker, Scott Moskowitz, John-Michael Arnold, Jessica Anderson, Carol Gallo, Michael Baca, and Katie Gualtieri. Last though most certainly not least, I am appreciative to my wife Meghan and parents, Randy and Nancy, for their unending love and support throughout this journey. Of notable absence is my sister Chelle, who passed unexpectedly after my first year at Harvard, yet whose presence is still felt daily in all of our lives. While I remain exceedingly proud of the forthcoming work, the presence of any errors, omissions, or mistakes is solely my own fault. vii INTRODUCTION What is the foreign policymaking logic by which African states decide to pursue their national security interests in the context of African IOs, or, conversely, outside of them? In following Dunn’s (2013, xxx) advice of “taking African experiences seriously” and Bates’ suggestion of the utility of a framing story in the introduction of academic