Restore, ensure, address, and guarantee security in the African Great Lakes Region: which coherence for which efficiency in post-conflict contexts?

It is no longer denied that security, in its multiple dimensions, constitute a major challenge for development. Yet, donor States seem to act in a somewhat schizophrenic way on this matter: on one hand, the nexus between security and development has been regularly re-asserted for about two decades; but on the other hand security issues are still linked to the more general political field and distinguished from cooperation – then more technical – activities. This fallacious and recurrent need for a strict differentiation leads to the expurgation of any frank talk on security matters between donors and partners. Nevertheless, insecurity, that is broadly depicted to go from incivility to armed conflict, remains a reality – or a threatening shade – for post-conflict States. In this context, donors’ initiatives are numerous and include, for example, multifaceted support to DDR/DDR processes and setting up of peacekeeping international forces, etc. Aid provision or « peace support » is thus materialized at various levels, through international (among them UN ones), and European missions, or again through bilateral partnerships, etc. From now on, the donors’ objectives aim at countering some well-identified weaknesses. However, what about the security segments that are disposed off or inadequately tackled by those donors, whether intentionally or not? « Forgotten » or neglected fields of security – at domestic level for instance – seem to be out of reach for any kind of external intervention, and even sometimes for the local partner itself. Can these “forgotten” segments be intentionally kept out of the external donors’ intervention scope by domestic elites? Do the latter aim at preserving peculiar dynamics of power and wealth captation that are hitherto anchored in the socio-economic structure? To what extent a jealous sovereignty over the security sector is considered to be a way to gain power and autonomy? This proposed panel aims at questioning the relevance and coherence of external intervention – or the relevance of its end goals – when operationalizing the security-development nexus, both from the donor’s and partner’s side/perspective. Proposals of communications or papers addressing the following aspects were paid particular attention during selection: - Review of bilateral and multilateral Belgium security commitment results (both civil and military) in African Great Lakes Region; - European Union "Security" missions - EUSEC RD Congo (civilian/military), EUPOL RD Congo (civilian): objectives, expectations, and achievements, particularly when considering their contribution to the partner country’s improved autonomy (nature, scope) and the population’s perception of this contribution. - Security in the African Great Lakes since the end of the conflict from a domestic or daily perspective. - The progressive "Africanization of peacekeeping" (via programs such as AFRICAP, bilateral partnerships of training, etc.): impact and/or profits on the homeland security of the States (in terms of constraints, trade capacities, and lessons learnt)