Photo Credit: trust.org

Since the coup of the military junta in Mali on March 22, ECOWAS has been charged with negotiating the terms of the transition to an elected government. While the junta initially agreed to hand over power to civilians and ECOWAS consequently lifted its sanctions, the junta now wants its leader, Amadou Sanogo, to become the new interim president. Sanogo insists on remaining in control and refuses to honor the ECOWAS deal which excludes military rule. The UN is sending a special envoy to the upcoming meeting of the ECOWAS Mediation and Security. This ISS Today article argues that ECOWAS was wrong in lifting its sanction without any serious guarantees from the junta. ECOWAS will have to take a strong stance if it wants to avoid further instability in the Sahel region.

Picture Credit: circleofblue.org

 On May 9, 2012, the US State Department released the first ever “Global Water Security” report looking at the way global water security issues impact the US. The report states that over the next 10 years, “water problems will contribute to instability in states important to US national security interests.” While the report concentrates on the seven river basins between the Nile and Mekong, it marks an important first step in acknowledging that local conflicts over water have long existed, but today a combination of water shortages and transboundary waterways gives rise to escalating international conflicts.

Photo Credit: guardian.co.uk

The EU has awarded G4S 10 million Euros to provide bodyguards for its Tripoli and Benghazi delegations, even though G4S is not legally allowed to work there. Neither the National Transition Council (NTC) nor the Libyan government permits G4S to operate in Libya. G4S also provides materials and services to Israeli prisons that hold Palestinian “administrative detainees” for the Israeli government in occupied territory, which leads to further controversy, making G4S and, by association, EU delegates potential targets for hostility in Libya.

Photo Credit: cnn.com

This openDemocracy article argues in favor of the need for a United Nations Emergency Peace Service (UNEPS.) Proponents of UNEPS claim that the UN’s current system of “humanitarian intervention” is insufficient under more demanding crises to prevent genocide and mass atrocities. UNEPS aims to design a permanent UN force ready for instant deployment upon authorization of the UN Security Council. Since peacekeeping forces often take many months to assemble and deploy, UNEPS could be a valuable tool in UN crisis response. However, if it were used as a quick-trigger heavily armed “humanitarian intervention” force, it could add to the nightmare of great power politics.

Photo Credit: safety4sea.com

There is a rising demand for private guards to board merchant vessels and deter attacks from Somali pirates. But a lack of rules governing the use of weapons by private actors on the high seas complicates the matter. In 2011, the UN’s International Maritime Organization issued weak, non-binding guidelines for private armed guards, stating that they should use no more force than what is strictly necessary. It is often difficult to differentiate between fisherman and pirates on the high seas, and a void in international maritime law has created “shoot-first” situations that risk innocent lives.

	Photo Credit: un.org

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is tangled up with Kenya’s public and political life, especially after the ICC indicted two of Kenya’s potential candidates for the 2012 presidential elections. The two indicted Kenyans are high level officials who allegedly funded violence in response to protests of Kenya’s corrupt 2007 elections. The ICC took up the case after Kenyan courts provided the officials with impunity. Kenyans are still positive about the ICC’s actions, with 54% public approval ratings, but that number is down from 68% in mid-2009. 

Picture Credit: UNCTAD.org

In this article, Deborah James of the Center for Economic and Policy Research extensively discusses the victory achieved by developing countries at the most recent UNCTAD conference. Developed and developing countries were pitted against each other over UNCTAD’s mandate, particularly with respect to its role in researching the financial crisis and offering macro-economic policy proposals. Hardly surprising, developed countries wanted to curtail UNCTAD’s mandates precisely because it had been so successful at predicting the financial crisis. This otherwise counter-intuitive position is typical for the powerful countries who want to rid themselves of interference from “outsiders” in the realm of global economic governance. During the tough negotiations, the developing countries “won” the fight and made sure that UNCTAD’s role would be retained. Even though UNCTAD’s standing can still not match that of the IMF and World Bank, the success at the 13th conference cannot be underestimated and may signal the beginning of a turning point for global economic governance.

Picture Credit: africacenter.org

Concerns have been raised over maritime insecurity in West Africa escalating to a level similar to that around the Horn of Africa. But while media reports often focus on the threat of piracy, this ISS Today article identifies one of the major sources of maritime insecurity being Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing. IUU fishing’s impact on food and human security could eventually bring about further political, economic and social instability in West Africa. In 2011, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2018 acknowledging the increasing importance of West African maritime security. However, the Resolution does not mention the problem of IUU fishing.

Photo Credit: worldpolicy.org

The G7 group of industrialized nations can function, but does not reflect the global balance of power, while the G-20 group of “major economies” is representative, but cannot function. Ian Bremmer coined the term “G-Zero” to describe the current situation in which no country or group of countries can take the lead in solving the world’s most pressing problems, like climate change, food and water scarcity, nuclear proliferation, and international security. The US has the world’s largest economy and military, but it is unable to provide effective global leadership to tackle such problems. The result is a situation in which every nation focuses solely on its own interests, rather than global concerns.  

Picture Credit: oursurprisingworld.com

Looking at the relationship between North and South Sudan, this Counterpunch article points out that the conflict involves outside actors that all have their own geopolitical interests. The US, Russia and China, but also Israel and neighboring Arab and African countries are fueling the conflict by supplying weapons to both countries and are exploiting the situation to their own advantage. International Crisis Group has urged the UN Security Council to take action in the region. However, taking into account the US’ support of Juba and Russia and China’s backing of Khartoum, these opposing interests prevent the UN from taking any course of action.