Over the last 30 years, Somalia has experienced a civil war that has torn the country apart. Countless civilians have lost their lives, almost all public institutions have been destroyed, and large...Show moreOver the last 30 years, Somalia has experienced a civil war that has torn the country apart. Countless civilians have lost their lives, almost all public institutions have been destroyed, and large segments of the Somali society have fled abroad to seek shelter (Mohamud 2020, 115). The country experienced a Hobbesian era of anarchy that symbolized what Robert Rotberg classified as “a rare and extreme version of a failed state. (…). a mere geographical expression, a black hole [where] there is dark energy, but the forces of entropy have overwhelmed the radiance that hitherto provided some semblance of order and other vital political goods to the inhabitants (no longer the citizens)” (Rotberg 2004, 9). To end Somalia’s acute state of anarchy and its protracted inter-tribal warfare’s, international multilateral organizations such as the United Nations (UN) and Somalia’s neighbouring countries have sought to mediate relations between the contesting factions that were exercising inter-tribal politics within the country. Three major peace and reconciliation conferences sponsored by the international community have been held to resolve the Somali impasse: the first summit took place in Borama (Somaliland) in 1993, the second in Arta (Djibouti) in 2000, and the third in Mbagathi (Kenya) in 2003. The Borama conference in particular is what led to the self-determination of Somaliland, which is not the theme of this thesis. The topic of this research is to look at the differences between these peace processes. By comparing the nature of these three conferences it is possible to identify practices and models of peacebuilding for Somalia, a country that is seeking stability to this day. Despite these costly peace-making conferences as it cost the United Nations (UN) and donor countries to spend enormous sums of money and resources, Somalia remains fragmented and unstable, with the current federal government barely able to control its capital, Mogadishu (Ingiriis 2020, 10). Through a top-down peace-making approach, the so-called international community (IC) has attempted to solve disputes between powerful actors without incorporating local values, history, expertise, and the everyday experiences of the wider Somali population into the peacemaking processes and ultimately these efforts have failed to produce effective dispute resolution (Ansems 2011, 99). Given these failures, this research attempts to investigate the underlying factors that explain the UN’s liberal peacebuilding approach (which applies a predefined conceptual top-down framework that neglects Somalia’s everyday experiences) and why it failed to bring forth any genuine reconciliation (Glawion 2020, 66). Due to the disconnect between the top-down peacebuilding framework and Somalia and democracy, this paper investigates how an alternative framework called the “pragmatic peacebuilding approach” which moves beyond traditional liberal peace, can facilitate a more practical approach to peacebuilding that is sustainable, reconciliatory and context-specific. This thesis will endeavour to test the following research question and hypothesis. The research question is quite straightforward: the UN’s top-down peacebuilding process has been taking place in Somalia for more than 20 years, why then have the UN’s efforts failed to yield plausible peace results in Somalia? The answer to the research question is based on the following hypothesis: in Somalia, top-down peacebuilding has prevailed over grassroots-level peacebuilding and this is why peacebuilding in Somalia did not succeed. The hypothesis is based on both a historical account of what has happened in Somalia, including Somaliland, since the early 1990s and on the review of the literature on the Somali problem as well as on peacebuilding in general. Somaliland achieved peace vis-à-vis a grassroots model of peacebuilding, while in the rest of Somalia the UN used a top-down approach.Show less
This thesis seeks to analyse the institutional framework guiding Russia’s growing interest in Arctic development. In particular, the research aimed to answer the question: How much agency do the...Show moreThis thesis seeks to analyse the institutional framework guiding Russia’s growing interest in Arctic development. In particular, the research aimed to answer the question: How much agency do the constituent entities of the Russian Federation have in the socio-economic development of the Arctic? The focus of the research is on transport infrastructure, the reason being that Arctic development hinges on the creation of an effective transport system so that other, more lucrative economic interests can be accessed and exploited. The research engaged with the legislative and strategic documents of both the federal authorities and the regions through a doctrinal analysis of policy mechanisms. The thesis contends that regions do have significant agency in the development of transport infrastructure, in so far as said transport infrastructure forms a part of the Support Zone mechanism. In doing so, the thesis shows that the Arctic regions enjoy the independence necessary to identify areas of economic interest in their regions, formulate a cluster of development projects, implement a corresponding program, and monitor the program’s progress. Additionally, the thesis was able to identify the limits of regional agency, which exist depending on the importance of a given socio-economic development project to the federal authorities. We see this determinant in practice in the hierarchical distinction between the Northern Sea Route and the land-based transport systems (including river and air transport). Due to the geopolitical potential of the Northern Sea Route, it occupies a place of supreme importance in Arctic development, and is therefore governed by the Centre. In contrast, land-based transport systems are principally of national, and economic importance, and thus their development is delegated to the regions.Show less
This thesis attempts to write about the history of the Federal Consultative Assembly, also known in Dutch as the 'Bijeenkomst Federaal Overleg' (BFO), an assembly of Indonesians striving for a...Show moreThis thesis attempts to write about the history of the Federal Consultative Assembly, also known in Dutch as the 'Bijeenkomst Federaal Overleg' (BFO), an assembly of Indonesians striving for a federal Indonesia. Their agency became important to Dutch and Republican powerbrokers during the Dutch-Indonesian war of 1945-1949. Historians, like George McT. Kahin, argue that these federal Indonesians were either Dutch puppets or political 'opportunists' and part of a Dutch divide and rule strategy to regain their former colony. The author of the thesis refutes such arguments. By analysing the BFO's agency during the conflict, it becomes apparent that they were not merely puppets or opportunists, but that their decisions to either coöperate with the Dutch or the Republic were largely based on the way the war developed. This meaning the violence used during the conflict, the exercission of control of powerbrokers over Indonesian territory and the expectations this created about who would remain in power in Indonesia in the future. It will be emphasized that their cooperation with either the Dutch or the Republic was mostly involuntary and depended on which powerbroker could keep them save from violent harm and could safeguard a future for them in the future indepedent Indonesian state.Show less
This paper will retrace the impact of Tatar nationalism on the para-diplomatic activities of the Republic of Tatarstan since the beginning of its sovereignty project in 1990. Moreover, it will try...Show moreThis paper will retrace the impact of Tatar nationalism on the para-diplomatic activities of the Republic of Tatarstan since the beginning of its sovereignty project in 1990. Moreover, it will try to introduce in its analysis some often ignored element of Tatarstan foreign relations, such as the Tatar diaspora and migration. It should be noted that, because of a lack of sources and available data, a large part of the study will concentrate on the first two decades of the RT, between 1990 and 2010, but it will nevertheless include more recent events when possible. The importance of this topic is not only linked to the lack of academic research, but also to the current instability facing the Russian Federation and the rise of a renewed nationalist sentiment among various ethnic minorities, including Tatars. Furthermore, the gradual withdrawal of autonomy rights by Putin administration puts Tatarstan and its political elite in a difficult position and opens the door for a renewal of ethnic and political tensions.Show less
This thesis paper researches and interprets the Russian federal system with the intention of observing it’s functioning throughout recent history. Foremost, the paper identifies that the Russian...Show moreThis thesis paper researches and interprets the Russian federal system with the intention of observing it’s functioning throughout recent history. Foremost, the paper identifies that the Russian federal system has experienced two radically different political environments, one of extensive decentralization and one of strong centralization, all within the historical experience since the inception of the modern Russian Federation (1991- ). Hence, the thesis statement and research question try to capture this phenomenon by asking: How do both centralization & decentralization impact the functioning of the Russian federal system? This question observes that there is an interplay between significantly centralizing and decentralizing a federal system, indeed, this paper attempts to observe the effects of both orientations in their most expressed form. The main intention being, to create a credible analysis of the two phenomena and the specificities of the two processes, in distinct time periods. The topics of federal ties, asymmetry, ethno-federalism and separatism are discussed distinctly in each wave of centralization and decentralization due to the persistence of these issues based on our scope of research and the time periods observed. Most importantly, these are hereditary issues spanning from eras that preceded the formation of the Soviet Union and issues that developed during the socialist era. In essence, in order to properly observe the Russian federal system, we mostly focus on the legacies of ethnic conflict, regional inequality and separatism as elements which are the product of and influence the processes of centralization and decentralization.Show less
