Failed and failing states: how has the international community reacted and should it act?

My earlier post on Somalia received some interesting comments which I would like to develop further.

First, framing state failure as a continuum is important because where a state stands in this continuum (i.e. its ability to react to international security emergencies that occur in its territory) informs decision makers on what (and if) actions are required by the international community. It is important that the decision is taken multilaterally and not by single states. The United Nations is, in my view, the organization that is best placed to decide whether and which kinds of international actions are required.

It is also important to note that the definition of what is a threat to the international security has evolved and is now more expansive. For example, as Gian Luca notes, it now includes health emergencies. The rationale of a military intervention to vaccinate or treat civilian populations is rightly questioned by Gian Luca, but it is important to note the international community is in the process of acquiring additional tools that will allow it to address common security concerns that are can be the consequences of failing states and their inability to work within the system. Natural and man-made environmental emergencies can also be a threat to the international security and need also be addressed in the same way.

I sympathize with the view that certain aspects of the analysis of state failure may recall unpleasant paternalistic visions. However, I think it is important to focus on the consequences of state failure and move away from a vision that frames actions by the international community as intrinsicaly “neo-colonial.” When states are failing and fail, and are unable to perform their obligations, domestic populations and the international community suffer. What is important is to focus on how the situation is remedied and assistance is provided. The international community made terrible mistakes in providing assistance in the past, both by creating protectorates and by sending peacekeeping forces which were often untrained, ineffective and lack clear mandates. It is paramount to learn from these mistakes, but should not exclude coherent, necessary and responsible actions.

Gian Luca points out that the need to be “creative” to find solutions and work around the obstacles that state failure. He points out the example of WHO’s action in Somalia in relation to polio eradication. Other international organizations have demonstrated similar creative powers. For example, in certain instances( including at times in Somalia) the UNDP administrator waived the requirement that receiving governments sign planned development projects, when central authority was lacking. Similarly, UNICEF negotiated Days Of Tranquillity with local communities to guarantee access to local populations for vaccination in conflict situations (for example in Sudan and Afghanistan). As Guglielmo notes, the international community has seldom remained completely inactive as adopted diverse actions to confront emergencies in failing states. I think it is important to take a step further and develop a consistent and predictable approach to security threats resulting from state failure.