Peripheral states and conformity to international norms: the dilemma of the marginalised

Abstract

This paper seeks to understand the seemingly paradoxical behaviour of states of the Global South, which on one the hand conform to transnational norms in order to integrate into the international society and on the other hand (sometimes simultaneously) differentiate themselves from them. To that end, this article develops the dilemma of the marginalised in order to show that conformity and differentiation become two paradoxical strategies for marginalised actors to pursue the same goal: equality with powerful states. The transformation of the Organisation of African Unity to the African Union, where significant changes in Africa’s policy vis-à-vis global powers took place, serves as a case study to illustrate how marginalised actors struggle between conformity and differentiation in order to claim their place in the international arena. It also shows how the dilemma of the marginalised can be compelling to help us understand the predicaments of marginalised actors across vastly different situations of structural inequality. Acknowledging the dilemma helps us understand their behaviour rather than to dismiss it as irrational, thereby recognising Third World agency in shaping the international system.

Keywords:

• Global powers
• inequality
• marginalisation
• African Union
• Global South
• the West

Disclosure statement

There is no conflict of interest in publishing this article.

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Professor Tobias Berger for his solid academic advice and tireless guidance throughout the entire project. I would also like to thank Professor Thomas Jäger for his helpful suggestions and comments. Similarly, the valuable statements, suggestions and questions of the anonymous reviewers helped to improve the article. Finally, I am indebted to all of my interviewees who shared their knowledge and experiences so openly with me.

Notes

1 Bull and Watson, Expansion of International Society, 1.

2 Ayoob, “The Third World in the System of States,” 67–75; Rao, Third World Protest, 35–105; Acharya, “Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders,” 95–123; Kenkel and De Rosa, “Localization and Subsidiarity,” 325–29; Finnemore and Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” 902–6; and Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 10–26.

3 Gilley, “Case for Colonialism,” 6–7; Kedourie, “New International Disorder”; and Barnes, Africa in Eclipse.

4 Pateman, Disorder of Women.

5 Acharya, “Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders,” 95–6; see also Adebajo, “Revolt against the West”; and Rao, Third World Protest.

6 Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 26–8.

7 Finnemore, “Norms, Culture, and World Politics,” 331–2.

8 Hallaq, Impossible State, 3–4.

9 Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 27–8.

10 Finnemore and Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” 902; see also Risse and Sikkink, “Socialization of International Human Rights Norms,” 1–10; Hurd, “Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics”; and Franck, “Legitimacy in the International System.”

11 Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 21–4; Berger, Global Norms and Local Courts, 21–4; Acharya, “Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders.”

12 Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 10–26; and see also Gurowitz, “Diffusion of International Norms.”

13 Acharya, “Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders,” 95–123; Acharya, “Idea-Shift,” 1156–60; and Kenkel and De Rosa, “Localization and Subsidiarity,” 325–9.

14 Rao, Third World Protest, 35–105.

15 Ayoob, “The Third World in the System of States,” 67–70.

16 Adebajo, “Revolt against the West,” 11–7; and Dersso, “Quest for Pax Africana,” 1187–9.

17 van Reybrouck, Kongo: Eine Geschichte, 303.

18 Gilley, “Case for Colonialism,” 3.

19 See also Kedourie, “New International Disorder”; and Barnes, Africa in Eclipse.

20 Bielefeldt, “Menschenrechtlicher Universalismus.”

21 Benhabib, Claims of Culture, 28.

22 Kaviraj, “Marxism in Translation,” 189; and see also Jensen, Making of International Human Rights, 4–5.

23 Berger, Global Norms and Local Courts, 30–2.

24 Alcoff, “Cultural Feminism versus Post-Structuralism.”

25 Abrams and Moio, “Critical Race Theory,” 249–50.

26 Wolfer, Discord and Collaboration, 10; and Wendt, “State as Person in International Theory,” 311–6.

27 Flowers, Refugees, Women, and Weapons, 8.

28 Jackson, “Hegel’s House,” 281; and Wendt, “Collective Identity Formation and the International State.”

29 Pateman, Disorder of Women, 196–7.

30 Ibid.

31 Finnemore and Sikkink, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change,” 902.

32 Hallaq, Impossible State, 4.

33 Berger, Global Norms and Local Courts, 21–4; on localization see Acharya, “How Ideas Spread.”

34 Acharya, “How Ideas Spread,” 248.

35 Acharya, “R2P and Norm Diffusion”; Rao, Third World Protest, 196–201; and Welsh, “Norm Contestation and the Responsibility to Protect,” 365–7.

36 Rao, Third World Protest, 197.

37 Robison, “Politics of ‘Asian Values.’”

38 Jensen, Making of International Human Rights, 3.

39 OAU, “Charter of the Organization of African Unity,” preamble.

40 Annan, Causes of Conflict, para. 10.

41 Dersso, “Quest for Pax Africana,” 15.

42 Wendt, “State as Person in International Theory,” 315–6.

43 Interviews were recorded and transcribed with the permission of interviewees. In one case the interviewee did not permit recording and detailed notes were taken instead.

44 Flick, Qualitative Sozialforschung: eine Einführung, 214–9.

45 George, From Rookie to Mandarin, 585–8; George and Ashiru, “Nigeria and the Organization of African Unity/African Union”; and Englebert and Dunn, Inside African Politics, 320–1.

46 Bah et al., African Peace and Security Architecture, 96–102.

47 OAU, “Charter of the Organization of African Unity,” preamble.

48 See eg AU, Durban Declaration in Tribute, para. 2; OAU, Declarations and Decisions Adopted by the 35th Assembly, 8; AU, Constitutive Act, 5.

49 OAU, “Charter of the Organization of African Unity.”

50 AU, Constitutive Act, 7–8.

51 OAU, Declarations, Resolutions and Decision Adopted by the 32nd Ordinary Session, 17.

52 OAU, Yaoundé Declaration, para. 2.

53 Interview by author with former Nigerian Permanent Representative to the African Union, April 2018.

54 Ibid.

55 AU, Sirte Declaration, 1.

56 AU, Ezulwini Consensus, 9.

57 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018, emphasis added.

58 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with ECOWAS, March 2018.

59 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018.

60 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with ECOWAS, March 2018.

61 Ibid.

62 AU, Ezulwini Consensus, 2; see also OAU, Algiers Declaration, 4; and UNSC, “5319th Meeting,” 3.

63 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with the African Union, April 2018.

64 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018.

65 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with ECOWAS, March 2018; and interview by author with expert contributing to the draft of the AU constitutive act, April 2018.

66 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018.

67 OAU, Algiers Declaration, 5 (emphasis added).

68 OAU, Yaoundé Declaration, 25–6.

69 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with ECOWAS, March 2018.

70 OAU, Algiers Declaration, 8 (emphasis added).

71 AU, Durban Declaration in Tribute, para. 2.

72 AU, Solemn Declaration on a Common African, para. 3.

73 AU, Constitutive Act, 3.

74 OAU, Cultural Charter for Africa, 3.

75 Ibid., 13.

76 See also Acharya, “Idea-Shift.”

77 AU, Protocol Relating to the Establishment, art. 11.

78 eg in the AU’s assembly; see AU, Constitutive Act, art. 7.

79 AU, Protocol Relating to the Establishment, art. 5, 2.

80 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018.

81 Ping, “African Union Role in the Libyan Crisis.”

82 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with the African Union, April 2018, emphasis added; and see also Sabrow, “Local Perceptions of the Legitimacy.”

83 Interview by author with former Nigerian Permanent Representative to the African Union, April 2018.

84 Interview by author with former Director of the Nigerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, March 2018.

85 Interview by author with staff member of peacebuilding organization partnering with the African Union, April 2018.

86 Ibid.

87 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018; and see also Sabrow, “Local Perceptions of the Legitimacy.”

88 see also Franke and Gänzle, “How ‘African’ Is the African Peace and Security Architecture”; and Franke and Esmenjaud, “Who Owns African Ownership?”

89 Interview by author with staff member of ECOWAS, Directorate of Political Affairs, Peace and Security, March 2018.

90 Acharya, “Norm Subsidiarity and Regional Orders.”

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Sophia Sabrow

Sophia Sabrow, originally from Berlin, Germany, currently lives in Nigeria. She is pursuing a PhD in political science at Freie Universität, Berlin, while working for the German Embassy in Abuja. She did her undergraduate studies in political science and economics at the University of Cologne and Scienes Po Paris and her master’s at the Graduate Institute, Geneva. Her research focuses particularly on norm dynamics in Africa. She has lived in different countries in sub-Saharan Africa for several years, where she tried to bridge the gap between policy and practice working for government and development institutions, on the one hand, and conducted field research, on the other.