Home  Journals  National Interests: Priorities and Security  3(372) - 2019 March

Peacekeeping South Africa: Challenges and opportunities

Received: 17 January 2019

Received in revised form: 1 February 2019

Accepted: 18 February 2019

Available online: 15 March 2019

Subject Heading: NATIONAL INTERESTS

JEL Classification: D74, F51, F55

Pages: 417–434

https://doi.org/10.24891/ni.15.3.417

Subject The article looks into the specifics of the South African peacekeeping policy.
Objectives The research determines the doctrine and vision of the South African policy for peacekeeping, its views on the UN Responsibility to Protect commitment, peacekeeping operations in Africa and specifics of interacting with key peacekeeping parties – the UN, regional institutions (African Union, BRICS) and Russia.
Methods The research is based on the historical analysis of the South African peacekeeping practices, institutional analysis for studying peacekeeping mechanisms, documentation analysis from perspectives of the international law.
Results We traced the principal trends in the evolution of the South African peacekeeping activities and determined how Russia and South Africa could possibly establish the peacekeeping cooperation.
Conclusions and Relevance South Africa will continue its peacekeeping efforts in the foreseeable future. In peacekeeping, South Africa is an advocate of Pan-Africanism and prefers regional peacekeeping organizations, rather than those supported by the UN. The latter fact makes the South African practices similar to the Russian ones across the post-Soviet space. The South African policy lacks resources for planning, implementation and conduct of its operations. Russia and South Africa could establish the peacekeeping cooperation ties through bilateral policy, collaboration under the auspices of the BRICS, Russia supporting the African Union policy, coordination of the countries’ efforts as part of the UN concept of the Responsibility to Protect commitment.

Keywords: UN, BRICS, peacekeeping, pan-Africanism

References:

1. Verhoeven H., Murthy C., Soares de Olivera R. “Our Identity is Our Currency”: South Africa, the Responsibility to Protect and the Logic of African Intervention. Conflict, Security & Development, 2014, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 509–534. URL: Link
2. Mandrup T., Smith K. South Africa’s “Diplomacy of Ubuntu”: An African Approach to Coexistence? In: The BRICS and Coexistence: An Alternative Vision of World Order. Ed. By C. De Coning, T. Mandrup, L. Odgaard. Abingdon, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2014, pp. 149–170.
3. Licoti F. The 1998 Military Intervention in Lesotho: SADC Peace Mission or Resource War? International Peacekeeping, 2007, vol. 14, iss. 2, pp. 251–263. URL: Link
4. Cheru F. African Renaissance: Roadmaps to the Challenge of Globalization. London, New York, Zed Books, 2002, 253 p.
5. Afrikanskaya integratsiya: sotsial'no-politicheskoe izmerenie [African Integration: Sociopolitical Dimension]. Moscow, Institute of Africa, Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2003, 145 p.
6. Konyshev V.N., Kubyshkin A.I., Sergunin A.A. [Protection of civilians as part of the UN peacekeeping operations: Problems and prospects]. Natsional'nye interesy: prioritety i bezopasnost' = National Interests: Priorities and Security, 2015, vol. 11, iss. 26, pp. 53–66. URL: Link (In Russ.)
7. Brosig M., Sempijja N. The African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crisis: Advice for African Policymakers. SAIIA Policy Insights, 2015, no. 22. URL: Link
8. Fitz-Gerald A. Towards a Common Doctrine for African Standby Force-led Peace Operations. International Peacekeeping, 2017, vol. 24, iss. 4, pp. 616–638. URL: Link
9. Warner J. Complements or Competitors? The African Standby Force, the African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crises, and the Future of Rapid Reaction Forces in Africa. African Security, 2015, vol. 8, iss. 1, pp. 56–73. URL: Link
10. Degrais N., Gouriellec S. The Challenges of Building the African Peace and Security Architecture. IRSEM Research Paper, 2017, no. 28. URL: Link
11. Bartels S., Scoptt J., Mukwege D. Patterns of Sexual Violence in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo: Reports from Survivors Presenting to Panzi Hospital in 2006. Conflict Health, 2010, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 1–10. URL: Link
12. Bellamy A. Whither the Responsibility to Protect? Humanitarian Intervention and the 2005 World Summit. Ethics & International Affairs, 2006, vol. 20, iss. 2, pp. 143–169. URL: Link
13. Konyshev V.N., Sergunin A.A. [BRICS Responses to a Responsibility to Protect concept. The search for consensus?]. Mezdunarodnye protsessy = International Trends, 2017, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 202–217. (In Russ.) URL: Link
14. Landsberg C. Multilateralism and the UN in South Africa’s Foreign Policy. Austral: Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations, 2015, vol. 4, no. 8, pp. 43–57. URL: Link
15. Mabera F., Dunne T. South Africa and the Responsibility to Protect. AP R2P Brief, 2013, vol. 3, no. 6. URL: Link
16. Daniel J., Naidoo V., Naidu S. The South Africans Have Arrived: Post-Apartheid South Africa’s Corporate Expansion into Africa. In: State of the Nation: South Africa 2003–2004. Ed. by. J. Daniel, A. Habib, R. Southall. Cape Town, HSRC Press, 2003, pp. 368–390.
17. Bragina E.A. [India – Africa: Trade and investments in the 21th century]. Kontury global’nykh transformatsii: politika, economika, pravo = Outlines of Global Transformations: Politics, Economy, Law, 2018, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 182–199. (In Russ.) URL: Link
18. Adams S. Failure to Protect: Syria and the UN Security Council. New York, Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect, 2015, 28 p. URL: Link

View all articles of issue

ISSN 2311-875X (Online)
ISSN 2073-2872 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 20, Iss. 4 April 2024

Archive