Third Party Intervention in Conflict Management: The Kenya-led Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Process and the Sudanese Conflict
Wamalwa, Juma Chemiati
MetadataShow full item record
This study interrogates factors that enabled the Kenya-led Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Process to successfully mediate between the Government of Sudan (GOS) and the Sudan People‟s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M). The core element of the study is triggered by the fact that other third parties made several attempts to resolve the conflict but they did not succeed. For instance, President Milton Obote of Uganda, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, the 1972 Addis Ababa Accord, the Koka Dam Conference of 1986, the Jimmy Carter Peace Initiatives of 1989 and finally the Abuja I and II Peace Conferences spearheaded by the then Nigeria‟s President Ibrahim Babangida in 1992 did not bear fruit. The salient issue of this study is why did the Kenya-led IGAD process succeed where all the other attempts did not? The study is guided by three main objectives; first, to examine factors which enabled the Kenya-led IGAD process to successfully mediate between SPLA/M and the GOS. Second, to evaluate the effects of the international community on the Kenya-led IGAD process and third, to assess challenges encountered by the Kenya-led IGAD process and how these challenges were overcome. The study employs the following three research premises; the skills and approaches of the IGAD mediators enhanced the success of the process, the international community exerted pressure on parties to negotiate for peace. Finally, separation of state and religion, and self-determination were contentious issues that proved a great challenge to the Kenya-led IGAD process. The study was guided by three research questions as follows; in what ways did the Kenya-led IGAD process succeed in the mediation of the conflict between SPLA/M and the GOS? What effect did the international community have on the Kenya-led IGAD process? What challenges were encountered by the Kenya-led IGAD process and how were they overcome? The study applies hegemonic stability theory according to which states with common interests usually formulate rules or policies to be observed by members to achieve their interests. The states‟ interests are either economic or political. In order to make the process legitimate, such interests can be pursued through an institutional setup. In this context the Kenya-led IGAD process was an institutional setup that was legitimately empowered to pursue peace in Sudan. Peace in Sudan would enhance the country‟s stability and in return guarantee the stability of IGAD States. The research methodology for this study entailed both primary and secondary data collection whereby sampling procedure undertook purposive and snowball techniques. The research design of the study was anchored on qualitative approach based on content analysis of variables. Research findings for this study are as follows; skills, impartially and knowledge of mediators contributed to the success of the Kenya-led IGAD process. It also emerged in our findings for this study that the unfolding political events in the Greater Horn of Africa region enabled the Kenya-led IGAD process to succeed in the mediation process between SPLA/M and the GOS. In conclusion, the essence of this study was to investigate the success of the Kenya-led IGAD process and challenges that hindered the process whether accruing from domestic or external forces. The Kenya-led IGAD process spanned for about twelve years right from the time of its inception in 1993 until the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005 thereby concluding the protracted conflict between SPLA/M and the GOS. Our recommendation is that the appointment of one as a mediator should be based on ones‟ suitability with regard to knowledge or expertise about the conflict that he/she is going to resolve. This would enable the mediator to come up with appropriate approaches to amicably mitigate the conflict within the interest of the parties in conflict.