AFRICAN STATES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE ENGLISH SCHOOL: FROM SOVEREIGNTY DEFICIT TO REGIONAL SOCIETY

Yıl 2020, , 22 - 35, 01.07.2020

Feride Aslı Ergül Jorgensen

https://doi.org/10.18354/esam.698105

Cited By: 1

Öz

This article argues that the mainstream argument that sovereignty of African states has remained unfinished due to the difficulties they faced in domestic politics, should be reread by taking into consideration the cooperation of continental countries and the new model of sovereignty that moves from outside to inside. In this context, the thesis that the concepts such as state, sovereignty and intervention are handled outside of classical Westphalian understanding. It makes this claim by following the trail of the regional community formation in Africa, which we can see as an extension of the English School's international community understanding. The African states, which do not want to return to the old colonial days, choose to cooperate against foreign interventions and this tendency has created an unusual form of sovereignty in the long run, along with domestic liberalization.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Africa, State, Sovereignty, English School

İNGİLİZ OKULU PERSPEKTİFİNDEN AFRİKA DEVLETLERİ: EGEMENLİK AÇIĞINDAN BÖLGESEL TOPLUMA

Öz

Bu makale, Afrikalı devletlerin egemenliklerinin, iç siyasette karşılaştıkları sıkıntılardan dolayı yarım kalmış olduğu ana akım iddianın, kıta ülkelerinin işbirliği ve beraberinde gelen dışarıdan içeriye doğru ilerleyen yeni egemenleşme modeli ile tekrar okunması gerektiğini iddia eder. Bu bağlamda, devlet, egemenlik ve müdahale gibi kavramların, klasik Westfalia anlayışının dışında ele alınmasının daha doğru olacağı tezi ele alınır. Bu iddiasını, İngiliz Okulu’nun uluslararası toplum anlayışının bir uzantısı olarak görebileceğimiz bölgesel toplum oluşumunun Afrika’daki izini sürerek yapar. Eski koloni günlerine dönmek istemeyen Afrikalı devletlerin, dış müdahalelere karşı içeride liberalleşmeyi de teşvik eden bölgesel işbirliği hareketinin, uzun vadede alışılagelmişin dışında bir egemenlik oluşumu ortaya çıkarır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Afrika, Devlet, Egemenlik, İngiliz Okulu

Kaynakça

• African Peer Review Mechanism Base Document (2003), http://aprm-au.org/document/aprm-base-document-0, (25.06.2019).
• African Union Comission (2019). Study on an African union government towards the United States of Africa https://archives.au.int/handle/123456789/2656 (24.01.2020).
• African Union Executive Council, Seventh Extraordinary Session, Ext/EX.CL/2 (VII) The Common African Position on the Proposed Reform of the United Nations: The Ezulwini Consensus (2005), http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/AU_Ezulwini%20Consensus.pdf, (30.06.2019).
• Annan, Kofi, “We the Peoples: the Role of the United Nations in the Twenty-first Century”, the UN General Assembly, Report of the Secretary-General, fifty-fourth session (2000), http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan000923.pdf, (25.03.2019).
• Bates, R. (1981), Markets and States in Tropical Africa: the Political Basis of Agricultural Policy, University of California Press, Berkeley.
• Bull, H. (ed.) (1984), Intervention in World Politics Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Bull, H., WATSON, A. (eds.) (1984), The Expansion of International Society Clarendon Press, Oxford.
• Charbonneau, B. (2008), “Dreams of Empire: France, Europe, and the New Interventionism in Africa”, Modern & Contemporary France, 16: 3, 279-289.
• Constitutive Act of The African Union, Documents and Speeches (2002), http://www.au2002.gov.za/docs/key_oau/au_act.htm, (01.06.2019).
• Dyson, K. H. F. (1980), The State Tradition in Western Europe: A Study of an Idea and an Institution, ECPR Press, Colchester, UK.
• Hentz, J. J. (2010), “System and Society in Sub-Sahara Africa: The English School in Terre Incognita”, Paper presented for the 7th Pan-European International Conference, Stockholm, Sweden.
• Herbst, J. (2000), States and Power in Africa, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
• ICSIS, International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect (2001), http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/ICISS%20Report.pdf, (25.05. 2019).
• International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICR2P), http://responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/crises, (06.02.2019).
• Jackson, R, Sørensen, G. (2010), Introduction to International Relations: Theories and Approaches, 4th edition, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
• Jackson, R. H. (1993), Quasi-states: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World, Vol. 12, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Jackson, R. H. (1987), “Quasi-States, Dual Regimes, and Neoclassical Theory: International Jurisprudence and the Third World”, International Organization, 41(4): 519-549.
• Kolstø, P. (2006), “The Sustainability and Future of Unrecognized Quasi-States”, Journal of Peace Research, 45: 6, 723-740.
• Lapidus, G. (2002), “Ethnicity and State-Building: Accomodating Ethnic Difference in Post-Soviet Eurasia”, (Eds. Bessinger, M. R., Young, C.), Beyond State Crisis? Postcolonial Africa and Post-Soviet Eurasia in Comparative Perspective, Woodrow Wilson Center/Johns Hopkins University Press, Washington, DC, 323-358.
• Masahiro, M. (2009), “Sovereignty and International Law”, Paper presented at the State of Sovereignty Conference, Durham University, the International Boundaries Research Unit, https://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/conferences/sos/programme/1_april/track1_session1/, (12.12.2019).
• Mays, T. M. (2003), “African Solutions for African Problems: The Changing Face of African-Mandated Peace Operations”, Journal of Conflict Studies, XXIII: 1, 106-125.
• Møller, B. (2009). “Regional and Global Axes of Conflict – The African Union as Security Actor: African Solutions to African Problems?”, Crisis States Working Papers Series No.2, Working Paper, no. 57, LSE – Development Studies.
• Montevideo Convention on Rights and Duties of States, Multilateral Treaties, Organization of American States (1933), http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-40.html, (25.06.2019).
• Pegg, S. (1998), International Society and the De Facto State, Ashgate, Aldershot.
• Rotberg, R. (2006), “The Failure and Collapse of Nation-States: Breakdown, Preventions and Repair”, (Ed. R. Rotberg), When States Fail: Causes and Consequences, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
• Stanislawski, B. (2008), “Para-States, Quasi-States, and Black Spots: Perhaps Not States, but Not ‘Ungoverned Territories’ Either”, International Studies Review, 10 (2), 366-396.
• Tan Shek Yan, E. (2013), Understanding African International Society: An English School Approach, PhD Thesis, Department of International Relations Aberystwyth University.
• Tieku, T. K. (2019), “The African Union: Successes and Failures”, Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics.
• United Nations Charter, Chapter 1, Article 2, Paragraph 4 and 7 (1945), http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/, (25.06.2019).
• United Nations General Assembly, Implementing the Responsibility to Protect, Report of the Secretary General, sixty-third session (2009), http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/63/677, (25.06.2019).
• United Nations General Assembly, Resolution 1514, “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”, 15. Assembly (14 December 1960), http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/declaration.shtml, (08.04.2019).
• United Nations General Assembly, World Summit Outcome. Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly, sixtieth session (2005), http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/pdf/World%20Summit%20Outcome%20Document.pdf#page=30, (18.04.2019).
• Vincent, R. J. (1986), Human Rights and International Relations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
• Wight, M. (1977), Systems of states, Leicester University Pr.