Still Under Construction : Regional Organisationsʹ Capacities for Conflict Prevention
The international community has progressively tasked regional and sub‐regional organisations
with conflict prevention and peacekeeping. This is largely due to an overburdened UN system.
At the same time regional organisations have increasingly come to accept that violence, interstate
and intra‐state wars normally affect the region through destabilizing spill‐over effects and
that promoting peace is in their own best interest. Yet, it is argued in this report that regional
organisations’ peace and security functions still do not amount to an effective regional conflict
management regime. Furthermore, not all regional and sub‐regional organisations have begun
to take on this responsibility.
The introductory chapter by Herbert Wulf summarizes the reasons why regional
organisations have played such a marginal role in the past and illustrates this with examples
from different regional organisations. Particularly the African Union and several sub‐regional
organisations in Africa are now taking on this newly ascribed role while the members of other
organisations (particularly within ASEAN and ARF) remain reluctant to give up national
sovereignty rights and to imbue the organisation with a peacekeeping role. The conclusion is
that the role of regional organizations in conflict prevention and conflict management has been
strengthened in recent years but that severe weaknesses, particularly the lack of common values
within regional organizations and their lack of capacities, still limit their conflict prevention
role.
This INEF report also presents two case studies on the potential and the limits of a peace
supporting role of regional organisations. First, Francine Jácome gives an overview of the role
of the Organisation of American States (OAS) and several sub‐regional organisations in Latin
America and the Caribbean and describes their conflict prevention role. This case study
illustrates how important these organisations have been in preventing and resolving conflict. At
the same time, the work of the OAS has suffered time and again from fundamental political
differences within the organisation.
The other case study on the conflict in Timor‐Leste by Akihisa Matsuno shows how
irrelevant ASEAN and the ASEAN Regional Forum have been in this conflict. It was mainly the
UN and a “coalition of the willing” under Australian leadership who reacted to the conflict in
Timor‐Leste. Matsuno discusses the structural deficiencies of the political system that led to the
crisis and argues that the main task of the UN transitional administration, the building of a
functioning democracy, was not achieved and local institutions were too weak and too much in
competition to establish a fully functioning state.