Inter-governmental Authority on Development on the Ground: Comparing Interventions in Sudan and Somalia

Abstract

ABSTRACT The Horn of Africa is beset by chronic insecurity and political tension, which has destabilized the region and undermined efforts to consolidate economic development and democratic governance. This article will focus on the emergence of the Inter-governmental Authority on Development, which was ostensibly tasked with promoting development among its member states. However, its mandate gradually expanded to address political, peace, and security issues. The article will assess the conflict system affecting the Horn of Africa, with a specific focus on Sudan and Somalia. The article will then compare the Inter-governmental Authority on Development interventions in Sudan and Somalia. It will argue that the two interventions illustrate, respectively, the strength and weakness of Inter-governmental Authority on Development as a subregional actor. More specifically, the Sudan case demonstrates Inter-governmental Authority on Development's appropriateness in managing the conflict between the north and south, given the marginalization of the African Union and the United Nations. On the other hand, the Somalia case illustrates the chronic limitations inherent in not only the Inter-governmental Authority on Development but also other regional economic communities in Africa. By comparing and contrasting Inter-governmental Authority on Development's interventions in Sudan and Somalia, the article will conclude with a set of recommendations on how Inter-governmental Authority on Development can learn from its experiences and strengthen its collective regional security pact.