| |
Contributions from
the Column
Facts and trends
Preventing AIDS through
social marketing of contraceptives
Guidelines for intervention
German Development Ministry budget for 2005
German Development Ministry concept on fighting AIDS
Malaria vaccine testing successful
Small loans, big impacts
400 billion dollars annually in bribes
“Leave us in peace!”
Separating civilian aid and the military
12/2004
|
|
[ State-building ]
Guidelines for intervention
State failure is often a result of distorted developments that began in the colonial era. While it is true that the majority of former colonies have not failed as independent states, many of them are weak. The decisive factor is how the political elites have dealt with their legacy of colonialism. Did they aggravate the problems, or did they manage to alleviate them? If international efforts to rebuild failed states are not to fail themselves, they must take the specific local conditions into account. The International Peace Academy, a think tank in New York, offers some key tips in a new study entitled “Making States Work. From State Failure to State-Building.”
According to IPA, states do not fail, political leaders do. That may happen because they are either incapable or corruptible, or because the underlying conditions are too unfavourable. “State-building works best when the population rallies around an enlightened leader.” Any outside powers wishing to intervene and have a stabilizing influence will depend on such leaders. At the same time, it is necessary to involve local populations along with the elites. This can be achieved by decentralisation for example. Federal states are usually more stable than centralised ones. Similarly, political leaders are generally more dependable when affiliated to political parties.
“States cannot be made to work from the outside,” say the IPA authors, who see no alternative to interventions necessary for security or human rights reasons. It is all the more important that intervention should follow a well-considered strategy. According to the study, however, security interests are often defined far too narrowly. An example mentioned is Afghanistan, where no effort is spared to combat terrorist threats, whereas attempts to stabilise the country politically seem half-hearted at best. Intervening powers are generally said to lack the necessary staying power because the domestic electorate wants success to come quickly, in spite of state-building taking years or even decades. The IPA suggests tackling such challenges by entrusting the United Nations with long-term tasks. The aim must be to help local actors to build legitimate and effective institutions, capable of administering a nation state.
Moreover, humanitarian organisations involved in state building constantly find themselves forced to decide which partners they can justifiably work with and which local actors should rather be avoided. Whether they like it or not, humanitarian helpers will have to get used to a fact acknowledged long ago in development circles – it is impossible to stay out of politics. (ell)
On the net:
http://www.ipacademy.org/Publications/Publications.htm
|
