A region is an area on the earth’s surface marked by certain properties that are homogeneous inside and distinct from outside it. It is a part of the Earth’s surface with one or many similar characteristics that make it unique from other areas. A region can be defined by natural (wildlife, climate) or artificial (language, government, religion) features. In this case, Malawi and Tanzania are two independent states that belong to the same economic and political region: SADC, an intergovernmental organization whose goal is to further socio-economic cooperation and integration as well as political and security cooperation among 15 southern African states.
The countries forming part of this region are all in the same geographical location, in the South of the African continent. Therefore, this region has both similar natural features as well as artificial ones: the intention of their governments to cooperate. SADC has not share a common language: it is a multilingual region. For which reason the organization has selected three official languages (English, French and Portuguese), all of which are European, as a reflection of their colonial experience.
This colonial experience has left other traces in the region. Some of these have led to conflicts between the member states. An example of these is the conflict that has been analyzed throughout this blog: the lake dispute between Malawi and Tanzania, a border conflict.
A border is commonly known as a line that divides one country from another. But like in this conflict, a border is much more than just a line: it’s a division of resources and, consequently, a restriction or increase of wealth of a certain country.
Member states of SADC share borders with each other, and it seems like they are an issue for the economic development of the region. Stakeholders and corporations have identified difficulties at borders as a major impediment to trade throughout the region. Since many countries are landlocked, goods have to cross several nation borders before reaching the market. The inefficiency to cross these borders results in delays. Citizens also find many obstacles to cross from one member state to another, and reducing the struggles of this mobility is one of the goals of the region.
As seen in this blog and as it has been previously mentioned, the dispute between Malawi and Tanzania is a border conflict, and it is not the only one happening at SADC. There are a number of other border conflicts, including one between South Africa and Swaziland, or between Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Some of these conflicts are causing population to migrate to other countries, which may be tough due to the lack of freedom of mobility inside the region. In the case of our studied conflict, it seems like diplomacy is being the way to which states are resorting to in order to solve it.
According to Oxford Dictionary, diplomacy refers to both “the skill of managing international relations, typically by a country's representatives abroad” and “the art of dealing with people in a sensitive and tactful way”. In the case of the border dispute between Malawi and Tanzania, we can hardly assess the effectiveness of diplomacy as a tool to settle the issue. Indeed, since 2012, the two countries have been holding talks on the dispute with help from a High-Level Mediation Team led by former Mozambican President. However, these diplomatic procedures were quite ineffective: 6 years later, things have not moved at all. Last year, Mkhuche, political expert, argued that “Malawi has to be commended for using acceptable means to solve this issue. Our approach has not been confrontational. Diplomacy is the way to go in such circumstances”.
It is quite clear that diplomacy would be the easiest way to solve the problem, as it is often the case. Who wills to engage on lasting procedures through international institutions when issues can be settled in a sensitive and tactful way?
This dispute highlights that when natural resources are involved, and therefore the future of the country itself, it is hard to resort to peaceful means to fix the issue since they would involve a loss of territory for Malawi, and therefore, a loss of sovereignty.
Sovereignty is imagined as the control of national states over resources in opposition to foreign capital. In other words, it is the supreme authority of a state over itself or another state. To have a better understanding of the concept we will relate it with Malawi – Tanzania border dispute.
First of all, we need to be aware that some African countries have limited sovereignty. In the case of Malawi, the country has become sovereign after getting its independence. Nonetheless, over the years Malawi has received numerous helps from Western countries which in turn have prolonged a dependency syndrome weakening its sovereignty. Although the public debt stock in Tanzania has also risen sharply in recent years, debt levels in the country remain prudent thanks to a period of robust economic growth. Regarding the border dispute, Malawi bases its claims of ownership over the entire lake to 1890 treaty, which was later reaffirmed in 1960s by the Organization of African Unity. On the other hand, Tanzania argues that international law supports sharing common bodies of water by bordering nations. Summing up, both nations can be considered weak states with limited capacities over their resources because the state was on the blink of losing its monopoly on force as a result of the dispute.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario