Understanding State Fragility through the Actor-Network Theory: A Case Study of Post-Colonial Sudan Bachelor Thesis in Peace and Development Studies Author: Tove Sternehäll Supervisor: Ludwig Gelot Semester: Spring 2016 Thesis Seminar: August 2016 Department: School of Social Sciences Course Code: 2FU32E Abstract Despite the broad discourse on fragile states and the threat they pose to the contemporary world order, the literature on the subject does to a large extent ignore the material factors behind the causes of state fragility. Scholars and organizations in the field have almost exclusively adopted the Social Contract Theory (SCT) in order to explain state fragility as a problem caused by social factors. This study broadens the discourse by applying SCT as well as the Actor-Network Theory (ANT) on the case study of Sudan, in order to do a deductive theory testing of the added value of each theory. The results of this study show that while the Social Contract Theory does explain many factors behind state fragility, the application of the Actor-Network Theory adds to this by also incorporating the networks between the social and material determinants in societies. This research contributes to the debate on fragile states by adding to the scarce research on the materiality of fragility through the use of the Actor- Network Theory. The positive results of this thesis encourage future use of this theory in the field as it has the potential to give new insights in how to deal with fragile states. Keywords: fragile states; Actor-Network Theory; Social Contract Theory; infrastructure of rule i Table of Contents ABSTRACT……………………………………………...................................................i TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………………......ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………….iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS………………………………...........................................v 1. Introduction ________________________________________________________ 1 1.1 Research Problem ................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Research Objective ............................................................................................... 3 1.3 Research Question ................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Methodology .......................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Structure of the Thesis ......................................................................................... 3 2. Conceptual Framework _______________________________________________ 5 2.1 Defining State Fragility ........................................................................................ 5 2.2 Core Principles of Fragility ................................................................................. 7 2.2.1 State Authority ________________________________________________ 7 2.2.2 State Legitimacy ______________________________________________ 8 2.2.3 State Capacity ________________________________________________ 9 2.3 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................. 10 3. Analytical Framework _______________________________________________ 11 3.1 Social Contract Theory ...................................................................................... 11 3.2 Actor-Network Theory ....................................................................................... 12 3.3 Comparison of the Theories .............................................................................. 14 3.4 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................. 15 4. Methodological Framework __________________________________________ 16 4.1 Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................... 16 4.2 Methods ............................................................................................................... 17 4.2.1 Qualitative Methods __________________________________________ 17 4.2.2 Case Studies _________________________________________________ 17 4.2.3 Data Collection ______________________________________________ 18 5. Findings ___________________________________________________________ 20 5.1 Background to the Case Study .......................................................................... 21 5.2 State Authority .................................................................................................... 22 5.2.1 Rule of Law _________________________________________________ 22 5.2.2 Monopoly of Violence _________________________________________ 23 5.2.3 Controlled Economy __________________________________________ 24 5.3 State Legitimacy ................................................................................................. 24 5.3.1 Democratization _____________________________________________ 24 5.3.2 Domestic and International Support ______________________________ 25 ii 5.4 State Capacity ..................................................................................................... 27 5.5 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................. 27 6. Analysis Chapter ___________________________________________________ 28 6.1 State Authority in Sudan ................................................................................... 28 6.1.1 Social Contract Theory ________________________________________ 28 6.1.2 Actor-Network Theory _________________________________________ 29 6.2 State Legitimacy in Sudan ................................................................................. 30 6.2.1 Social Contract Theory ________________________________________ 30 6.2.2 Actor-Network Theory _________________________________________ 31 6.3 State Capacity in Sudan ..................................................................................... 32 6.3.1 Social Contract Theory ________________________________________ 32 6.3.2 Actor-Network Theory _________________________________________ 33 6.4 Discussion ............................................................................................................ 33 7. Conclusion _________________________________________________________ 36 References ___________________________________________________________ 39 iii Acknowledgement I would like to thank my supervisor Ludwig Gelot for his support and guidance during this thesis. iv List of Abbreviation ANT Actor-Network Theory DRC Democratic Republic of Congo R2P Responsibility to Protect SCT Social Contract Theory UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme v 1. Introduction 1.1 Research Problem The world has as a result of the technological advancements over the last decades become more globalized, tying together every country across the globe. One of the main challenges to the contemporary world order are, due to this, the problems caused by unstable sovereign states (Demir & Varlik, 2015, 40). These states are often referred to as fragile, which means that the government of a state is unable to keep the country stable in one way or another. There are a number of levels of fragility discussed within the social science discourse, including ‘weak’, ‘failing’, ‘failed’ and ‘collapsed’ states (Di John, 2010). The latter two represent the end stage of fragility, which means that the government has lost authority over the state, or in other words, that the country is left in what can be described as an anarchical state (Miner & Trauschweizer, 2014). While it is a well-researched field, there is no general agreement on what characterizes each of these stages of fragility (ibid). There is, however, a wide consensus that these states pose a great threat to their citizens, neighbouring countries as well as the international community at large (Sandler, 2014; Roy & Crane, 2015; Demir & Varlik, 2015). Some of the major problems that cause and are caused by fragile states include global poverty, refugee flows, the spread of civil wars and terrorism (ibid). In many states that are experiencing a high level of fragility, oppression of marginalized groups is not uncommon, often as a result of ethnic, cultural or religious differences (Demir & Varlik, 2015). This can lead to a mobilization of rebel groups, with violent uprisings, civil wars and the creation of terrorist networks as a result (ibid). These generally leads to humanitarian crises, such as refugee flows and an increased poverty due to a weakened social security sector in the state (ibid). In turn, global poverty poses a big challenge for the international community, as it is both a humanitarian issue as well as a driver for the poor to seek informal ways to make a living, which may include joining rebel groups and terrorist networks (Roy & Crane, 2015). Meanwhile, terrorism has over the last three decades shifted focus from being a form of military warfare to targeting civilians (Sandler, 2014). Together with civil wars, terrorism is one of the biggest drivers of refugee flows, which is not only a humanitarian problem for those who are forced to risk their lives to escape certain death, but also causes problems for other countries that 1 do not have the capacity to take them in (Global Terrorism Index, 2015; United Nations, 2016; UNHCR, 2016). The international community has since the Second World War worked together to end conflicts and support regimes in fragile states in order to stabilize