The management of border disputes in African regional sub-systems: comparing West Africa and the Horn of Africa

Abstract

In Africa, the management of border disputes varies from sub-region to sub-region. Most puzzling is the difference between West Africa and the Horn of Africa. In the latter, border disputes are much more likely to escalate into war than in the former. Seeking to solve this puzzle, this study focuses on the territorial integrity norm. It departs from existing accounts of this norm in two ways: first, it does not choose the region but the sub-region as the level of analysis. Second, it does not isolate the territorial integrity norm from its social context but analyses the interplay of the norm with the social structure in which it is embedded. It concludes that the territorial integrity norm in West Africa is part of a social structure different from that in the Horn of Africa. It is this difference that explains the different patterns of conflict management in the two sub-regions.

Arms Racing in ‘Space’: Spatial Modelling of Military Spending around the World

“…Keller (1997, 296-9, 301-2) argues that African states are preoccupied with their own poverty, lack of legitimacy owing to 'artificial' borders and military weakness. This combination of factors leads to mutual understanding verging on a norm that territorial integrity and sovereignty should be respected above other values in international relations (see also Kornprobst 2002). So, although internal conflict is common, the results here support area specialists' interpretation that leaders make deliberate efforts to avoid international conflict because they sense their own vulnerability given the weakness of their states.…”

The geopolitics of Boko Haram and Nigeria's ‘war on terror’

“…Biafra comprised nine states in the south‐east, from Bayelsa in the west to Cross River in the east, and Enugu in the north; and with Enugu as capital. This was one of the first struggles in Africa to test the terms of the Cairo Declaration of the Organization of African Unity in 1964 which stated that ‘the borders of African states, on the day of their independence, constitute a tangible reality’ (Organisation of African Unity ; see Kornprobst ). This adoption of uti possidetis in international law, following an earlier precedent in South America, has since been a key norm in politics, used in the breakup of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia into their constituent republics (see Lalonde ).…”

Territorial Integrity Treaties and Armed Conflict over Territory

“…Similarly, Kornprobst (2002) notes that the territorial integrity norm in the Horn of Africa was secondary to the primary norm of decolonization, with the result that border disputes not only developed but endured and escalated to war. Further research should investigate which of these …”