What makes a state a failure? And why does the international community not do anything to help? In the case of Somalia, help has been given time and time again, with no progress or improvement made of affairs. There are many theories in International Relations, but the Realist and Liberalist approach explain the situation in Somalia with the most precision. The failed state of Somalia also explains why international intervention does not help in the domestic affairs of a state, but often increases tensions. The efforts of the international community failed in Somalia due to obstacles such as the ignorance of culture and the lack of sovereign authority to work with.
There are many factors that play into what makes a state a …show more content…
Liberalists believe that international politics are shaped by domestic affairs and issues. The internal conflict in Somalia can be explained through the concept that actors other than states, such as religious or ethnic groups, have power as well. Liberal thought sees peace treaties and agreements between various ethnic groups within the same state as a solution to conflict. In a sense, even though Somalia has one of the “ethnically homogenous” populations of Africa, and in realist theory, Somalia should have been a peaceful, stable state; liberal theory shows that peace treaties matter more than states simply having ethnically similar citizens (Gros 1996). The failed state of Somalia is due to the role of non-state actors within the state that took control and power away from government, and due to problematic undemocratic regimes or corruption within the government. The causes of war according to liberalism is human nature, meaning the grab for power within states or because of government intervention, the state, as in foreign policy, and third, the structure of the system, meaning the balance of power between states in the world (Dunne 2014, …show more content…
John Yoo explains it is because “[states] serve as an incubator for international terrorist groups”, and the “lack of stable government authority allows them to become trans-shipment points for illicit drugs, human trafficking, or the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction”(2011). The UN charter states that intervention is only allowed in instances of defence of state or when approved by the Security Council. There is no mention of intervention allowed in terms of state rebuilding, though it has been justified at times of human rights violations. Ken Menkhaus states that “in 2008 Somalia earned the reputation as the most dangerous country in the world for humanitarian aid”, this is due to the extreme insecurity and the militia roadblocks, along with the displacement of civilians who had no means of getting food (2009). The UN efforts to aid were blocked at every point by insurgent
There are many factors that play into what makes a state a …show more content…
Liberalists believe that international politics are shaped by domestic affairs and issues. The internal conflict in Somalia can be explained through the concept that actors other than states, such as religious or ethnic groups, have power as well. Liberal thought sees peace treaties and agreements between various ethnic groups within the same state as a solution to conflict. In a sense, even though Somalia has one of the “ethnically homogenous” populations of Africa, and in realist theory, Somalia should have been a peaceful, stable state; liberal theory shows that peace treaties matter more than states simply having ethnically similar citizens (Gros 1996). The failed state of Somalia is due to the role of non-state actors within the state that took control and power away from government, and due to problematic undemocratic regimes or corruption within the government. The causes of war according to liberalism is human nature, meaning the grab for power within states or because of government intervention, the state, as in foreign policy, and third, the structure of the system, meaning the balance of power between states in the world (Dunne 2014, …show more content…
John Yoo explains it is because “[states] serve as an incubator for international terrorist groups”, and the “lack of stable government authority allows them to become trans-shipment points for illicit drugs, human trafficking, or the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction”(2011). The UN charter states that intervention is only allowed in instances of defence of state or when approved by the Security Council. There is no mention of intervention allowed in terms of state rebuilding, though it has been justified at times of human rights violations. Ken Menkhaus states that “in 2008 Somalia earned the reputation as the most dangerous country in the world for humanitarian aid”, this is due to the extreme insecurity and the militia roadblocks, along with the displacement of civilians who had no means of getting food (2009). The UN efforts to aid were blocked at every point by insurgent