Scholarlink

Chapter one establishes the foundational context for the book by examining the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)’s evolving role in peace and security governance amid a fragmented international order. As liberal multilateralism wanes and the legitimacy of global institutions such as the UN declines, regional actors like IGAD are increasingly assuming primary responsibility for conflict resolution, particularly in Africa. The chapter positions IGAD’s peace intervention in South Sudan—culminating in the 2018 Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS)—as a significant case through which to interrogate the shifting architecture of peace-making in the Global South. The chapter introduces key concepts such as strategic hybridisation—IGAD’s blending of liberal, illiberal, Pan-African, and pragmatic peace practices—and platformisation, which captures IGAD’s informal, non-rule-based mode of governance. The chapter also outlines the book’s methodological approach, based on qualitative fieldwork, 47 semi-structured interviews, and interpretive analysis grounded in International Political Sociology (IPS) and pragmatic Pan-Africanism. Three interlocking empirical and conceptual themes emerge: the “Ugandan perspective,” which frames Uganda as a central and uniquely invested actor in South Sudan; a “regional consensus” among IGAD states on the importance of African-led peace processes; and a “contra-narrative” advanced largely by external actors who portray IGAD as institutionally weak or politically compromised. The chapter contends that such divergent perspectives reveal deeper ideological tensions between Eurocentric and Pan-African visions of peace, regionalism, and governance. Ultimately, this chapter sets up the core inquiry that animates the rest of the book: How does IGAD’s intervention in South Sudan reflect broader shifts in Africa’s peace and security governance, and what does it tell us about the possibilities for rethinking peace-making from an African perspective?

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

IGAD’s contested role in a troubled world

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • Ibrahim Sakawa Magara

摘要

Chapter one establishes the foundational context for the book by examining the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)’s evolving role in peace and security governance amid a fragmented international order. As liberal multilateralism wanes and the legitimacy of global institutions such as the UN declines, regional actors like IGAD are increasingly assuming primary responsibility for conflict resolution, particularly in Africa. The chapter positions IGAD’s peace intervention in South Sudan—culminating in the 2018 Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS)—as a significant case through which to interrogate the shifting architecture of peace-making in the Global South. The chapter introduces key concepts such as strategic hybridisation—IGAD’s blending of liberal, illiberal, Pan-African, and pragmatic peace practices—and platformisation, which captures IGAD’s informal, non-rule-based mode of governance. The chapter also outlines the book’s methodological approach, based on qualitative fieldwork, 47 semi-structured interviews, and interpretive analysis grounded in International Political Sociology (IPS) and pragmatic Pan-Africanism. Three interlocking empirical and conceptual themes emerge: the “Ugandan perspective,” which frames Uganda as a central and uniquely invested actor in South Sudan; a “regional consensus” among IGAD states on the importance of African-led peace processes; and a “contra-narrative” advanced largely by external actors who portray IGAD as institutionally weak or politically compromised. The chapter contends that such divergent perspectives reveal deeper ideological tensions between Eurocentric and Pan-African visions of peace, regionalism, and governance. Ultimately, this chapter sets up the core inquiry that animates the rest of the book: How does IGAD’s intervention in South Sudan reflect broader shifts in Africa’s peace and security governance, and what does it tell us about the possibilities for rethinking peace-making from an African perspective?