The EU, security sector reform and border management in Mali: Working paper on the implementation of EU crisis response in Mali (original) (raw)
Related papers
The EU, security sector reform and border management in Mali
The EU’s concern with the fragile states of Sahel is not new. This became evident already in 2011 through the EU Strategy for Security and Development in the Sahel (EU 2011). The conflict that erupted in Mali in 2012 pushed the issue of the Sahel even higher on the agenda, and the migration crises of 2014/15 made the Sahel a concern of ‘high politics’ for Europe. As a result, the EU and other international stakeholders are increasingly involved on the ground in Mali and several other Sahel countries through Operational Serval and now Barkhane (France), MINUSMA (the United Nations) and the deployment of two EU police and military training missions. It is the latter two missions that constitute the main case studies in this report. They are the EU Capacity Building Mission (EUCAP Sahel Mali) and the EU Training Mission to Mali (EUTM). Despite the efforts of these international interventions, security in Mali is deteriorating, and the conflict has spread to the centre of the country. Central Mali is currently gripped by escalating insecurity, due to an increase in inter-communal conflicts, the proliferation of self-defence groups and non-state actors including violent extremist ‘jihadist’ groups and bandits. Consequently, 2017 has been the most violent year since the French intervention in 2013 (see Ba and Bøås 2017). This paper offers a critical review of the EUTM and EUCAP in Mali, arguing that this is another example of international interventions that may be well-intended, but that end up producing very mixed results on the ground. One reason for this is the gaps between intentions and implementation and between implementation and local reception/perceptions. Whereas the first gap points to mismatches between EU policy intentions and what effect the implementation of these policies actually have (see for example Hill 1993), the latter gap reveals the inability of an international actor to both understand how key concepts such as ‘security sector reform’ and ‘border management’ are understood on the ground as well as translating its own policies and Brussels’ developed mandate into policies that makes sense for people on the ground (Cissé, Bøås, Kvamme and Dakouo 2017). This paper will therefore assess the opportunities, limits and consequences of EU crisis response on the ground by studying the match or mismatch between the mandates and the practices in the field. The crisis responses examined are the EUTM, EUCAP as well as the border management policies within the EU Trust Fund (EUTF). In doing so, we will investigate and evaluate the EU’s practices of ‘conflict sensitivity’ and their bottom–up considerations by describing its practices in engaging local actors (elites as much as affected communities) and evaluating the presence or absence of local ownership and the latter’s significance for the impact-effectiveness of EU policies. This paper is based on review of documents and detailed fieldwork in Mali. Most of the interviews and meetings that forms the background for this work was conducted when most authors of this report were in the field in October and November 2017.
The European Union and Security Sector Reform: current practices and challenges of implementation
European Security, 2012
This article presents an introduction to the special volume, titled The European Union (EU) and the Security Sector Reform Practices: Challenges of Implementation, by framing the debate on the EU's Security Sector Reform (SSR) activities in a variety of conflict and post-conflict settings. Drawing on the existing body of literature on SSR, the analytical model proposed here allows us to identify, categorize, and group a wide range of factors that are relevant for understanding the performance of the EU as an SSR actor. This article introduces the main themes of this special issue, summarizes each individual contribution briefly, extends the main research findings of this special issue, and concludes with broad commonalities across different cases. It is a conceptual article outlining a discussion of wider theoretical reflections based on the empirical contributions presented in this volume, and provides an explanatory framework for success or failure in the individual case studies that follow.
Schizophrenic agendas in the EU's external actions in Mali
International Affairs, 2020
Because of its geographical proximity to the EU, the Sahel region's perceived cross-border security threats of terror, migration and organized crime have become a top European security policy priority. Contributing to existing debates on EU external actions, the article develops the idea that the EU's engagement in the Sahel has become an attempt to construct and confirm the Union's ability to act as a global security actor. Through the analytical lens of ‘translation’ emphasizing the continuous transformation of norms and ideas by actors and contexts, the article examines how EU staff implement shifting policy objectives in their security practices in Mali; the effects these intervention practices produce; and how, in turn, these effects reflect back upon the EU's role as a security actor. The article shows how the EU's actorness and ability to perform security are hampered by the lack of buy-in from their local partners, as narrating success in a context of escalating violence becomes increasingly implausible. Thus, we argue that while the EU's activities in Mali reinforce the idea of the EU as a security actor, the limited character and impact of the EU's activities on the ground also reinforce the idea of it as a limited or even ineffective actor. The article thereby provides fruitful input to discussions of the constitutive effects of everyday practices in interventions and the production of EU security actorness as played out in the Sahel.
Study requested by the European Parliament's Sub -Committee on Security and Defence. Although the EU has become a leading multilateral actor in the field of security sector reform (SSR), it continues to face significant challenges that hinder its potential for delivery. In the run-up to the prospective adoption of an EU-wide strategic framework for supporting SSR, this study aims to shed light on the realities faced by SSR policy makers and practitioners. By looking at the EU’s SSR track record, as well its involvement in the complementary process of disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR), this study provides an assessment of the lessons learnt and highlights the ways forward for the EU as a security provider, particularly ahead of the launch of its maiden Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy (EUGS).
The EU as a security actor in Africa
Instability and conflict in Africa create a range of security problems for Europe. Rapidly increasing migration via the Mediterranean Sea, extremism and terrorism, as well as cross-border crime, all have implications for security in Europe, but are spill-over effects of instability outside Europe. The European Union has a considerable interest in a stable Africa, and also seems willing to assume a special responsibility for the continent. This Clingendael report focuses on the European Union’s role as a security actor in Africa. It considers the use of all the policy instruments at the EU’s disposal. The authors concentrate mainly on the question how the integrated approach is evolving, and what consequences this has for the Common Security and Defence Policy.
The European Union as a Security Actor in the Sahel
European Review of International Studies, 2021
In the past decade, the EU has significantly stepped up its profile as a security actor in the Sahel. Drawing on historical institutionalism, we conceptualise path-dependencies and lock-in effects as elements of a “foreign policy entrapment” spiral to analyse the EU’s policies towards the Sahel. Specifically, we seek to explain the EU’s increasingly widened and deepened engagement in the region. Hence, this article traces the evolution of the EU’s Sahel policy both in discourse and implementation. We identify a predominant security narrative as well as a regionalisation narrative and show that EU action has followed these narratives. Based on this analysis, we argue that the evolution of the EU’s Sahel policy can be understood as a case of “foreign policy entrapment”. Initial decisions on the overall direction of EU foreign policy have created strong path-dependencies and lock-in effects that make it difficult for EU policy-makers to change the policy course.