This article investigates and assesses a peacekeeping mission of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) as it relates to a case study of South Africa’s intervention in the Lesotho conflict in 1998. The article bases its argument on the international relations paradigm of realism so as to refute South Africa’s claim that the SADC sanctioned the 1998 military intervention and that this armed intervention was aimed at promoting democracy and stability. Realists interpret world politics as a struggle for power and survival in an anarchic world. The aims of this article are to: determine the reasons for the said military intervention and the extent to which it was conducted on humanitarian grounds; investigate and assess the degree to which the intervention by South Africa was encouraged by national interests; determine the nature of the involvement of the SADC, African Union (AU) and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in the 1998 intervention; and explore the 2014/2015 mediation process and the challenges encountered. The study used qualitative techniques for data collection and analysis. The primary and secondary data were obtained from government and other publications and reports. The article argues that South Africa appears to have used the 1998 intervention and the mediation process in 2014/2015 to pursue its strategic and economic interests in the Kingdom of Lesotho, because it was not mandated or authorised by the UN, AU, and SADC to carry out these actions. The intervention was not a humanitarian peacekeeping mission to rescue Lesotho from a coup as claimed by South African officials. The intervention appears to have been inconsistent with the UN charter and the SADC treaty.

No abstract

No abstract

The crisis in South Sudan that broke out on the 15th of December 2013 has been the gravest political debacle in the five years of the country’s independence. This crisis typifies the general political and social patterns of post-independence politics of nation-states that are borne out of armed struggles in Africa. Not only does the crisis expose a reluctance by the nationalist leaders to continue with nation-building initiatives, the situation suggests the struggle for political control at the echelons of power within the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Movement.  This struggle has been marred by the manufacturing of political identity and political demonization that seem to illuminate the current political landscape in South Sudan. Be that as it may, the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) hurriedly intervened to find a lasting solution however supportive of the government of President Salva Kirr and this has suggested interest based motives on the part of the regional body and has since exacerbated an already fragile situation. As such, this article uses the Fanonian discourse of post-independence politics in Africa to expose the fact that the SPLM has degenerated into lethargy and this is at the heart of the crisis.

No abstract