United Nations Security Council primacy over military interventions in Africa and the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA)

Abstract

With the end of the Cold War there is a reassertion of regionalism in the international system. In terms of security, this process has the potential to challenge the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) primacy on decisions over military interventions. This paper investigates this possibility in Africa using a revised version of the historical structure of Robert Cox with elements of conventional constructivism. The results are that: the idea of regionalization of security returned to the academic agenda since the 1990s; inter-organizations norms and policies developed to accommodate an exception to UNSC primacy in cases when the African Union (AU) is awaiting a UNSC decision; there is a significant number of military interventions without UNSC authorization between 1990 and 2010, but after 2010 there is no new military intervention without UN SC authorization or recognition; the low capacity of actors in Africa prevents a more interventionist policy without UN SC authorization, but South Africa and to a less extent Nigeria have the potential to shape interventionism in Africa alongside other countries which are capable and willing to engage in sporadic military interventions in their sub-regions. The paper concludes that the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA), centered at the AU, has the potential to decrease the likelihood of civil war initiation if it works consistently and based on clear guidelines as a security guarantee for governments.