Africa faces several peace and security challenges such as political and electoral related issues, climate change and its trickle-down effect on food security, violent extremism, gender inequalities, refugees and humanitarian crises amongst others. The continuous cycles of leadership deficiency characterised by tyrants and retrogressive divisions along ethnic, tribal and religious lines remain a key issue that has been central to conflict. This is coupled with conflicts, which are becoming complex and volatile, due to conflict entrepreneurs and geopolitics through proxy and proxy free-for-all.
These cycles continue to present a threat to both national and regional stability and have denied the continent the opportunity to realise its full development potential. Member states have initiated diverse political and economic programmes that have not adequately addressed deep-rooted issues of historical injustices, systematic exclusion, marginalisation and inequalities, thus limiting human development and positive peace. At the centre of slow development and conflicts is the youth, where masses are coming into economies that are unable to accommodate and sustain them and political contexts that have failed to provide an enabling environment to exercise their full development potential. Consequently, catalysing vulnerability to elements that threaten peace and security.
At the global level, the youth peace and security agenda is backed by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250 (UNSCR 2250) adopted in 2015 which focuses on youth as key catalysts in the promotion and maintenance of peace and security. The resolution highlights five key pillars for the effective contribution of youth in this sphere i.e. participation, protection, prevention, partnership and disengagement and reintegration. In light of UNSCR 2250, the African continent has made strides to ensure adaptation of the resolution and domesticating it for African contexts. This framework is the African Union Continental Framework on Youth, Peace and Security (accompanied by its implementation plan) which further supports the agenda by aiming to facilitate the meaningful engagement and participation of African youth in all spectrums of peace and security at national, regional and continental levels.
The best way to realise the Youth, Peace and Security (YPS) agenda on the continent is by adopting National Action Plans (NAPs) which are practical documents that detail the actions a government is taking to meet its obligations under the UNSCR 2250 and other internationally agreed-upon resolutions. NAPs ensure that governments translate these commitments into concrete policies and programmes. NAPs also provide valuable accountability tools for states and civil society. Furthermore, NAPs provide opportunities for national stakeholders to convene around a planning tool that identifies priorities, determined responsibilities, allocates resources and initiates strategic actions within a defined timeframe to deliver policies and programmes that respond to the needs and priorities of conflict and crisis-affected youth and communities from a youth perspective.
The development of NAPs on YPS is in its early stages across the world and requires member states to be intentional about resourcing their development and implementation, whilst including youth in the process. As it stands, the four-member states to the UN that have adopted NAPs on YPS are Finland, The Philippines, Nigeria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). It is important to note that each of these four-member states have their own dynamics when it comes to peace and security, specifically how the conflict relates to YPS. The DRC is characterised by conflict and instability whereas Finland is a peaceful country. Thus, for Finland, despite being a peaceful state, there was a need to provide a platform where peace was used as a preventive measure. In the DRC’s case, coupled with its demographic and geographic composition, it was key to adopt a localisation model for the NAP considering the various existing challenges. Poor infrastructure has posed challenges to access some areas of the country, thus limiting inclusion and data collection. On the other hand, in the case of Nigeria, which has a culture of violence as well as its geographical composition, mapping out was done based on the six geopolitical zones, whilst taking into account that each has its own conflict dynamics to be inputted in the NAP.
The development of NAPs on #YPS is in its early stages across the world and requires member states to be intentional about resourcing their development and implementation, whilst including youth in the process
Tweet
The demographic component of youth is not an incentive but an economic approach where member states ought to recognise and tap into youth potential towards advancement of peace, security and development. The first step begins with contextualising the youth, peace and security agenda and countering the knowledge and capacity gap at grassroots level, state institutions and all stakeholders involved in the implementation process of NAPs on YPS. Contextualisation is also in line with conflict dynamics and how the specific conflict relates to YPS. Secondly, member states remain the key driver where political will is key through support in participation, development and implementation and thirdly, design through an integrated and inclusive approach at all stages where all clusters ought to be represented: rural, urban, informal settlements and border communities are crucial. Additionally, the fourth step includes coordination among all stakeholders involved in implementation through identifying models of interaction between them, where each ought to be conversant with their roles and responsibilities and refrain from competition and politics
The last three stages of developing these NAPs involve mainstreaming youth in the process by being the beneficiaries of the NAP coupled with an intergenerational lens. Diversity and needs of youth ought to be central for they are not homogenous i.e. PLWDs, refugees and asylum seekers, sexual minorities, indigenous groups, rural-based youth, etc. Furthermore, the monitoring, reporting and evaluation where formulating actual results and indicators of success of the implementation of actions will assist in determining the effectiveness of the NAPs. Finally, budget and financing, where member states need to commit financial resources and structures that are inclusive of youth to create NAPs on YPS towards human development i.e. assessing the financing sources ratio and building a financial model.
The demographic component of youth is not an incentive but an economic approach where member states ought to recognise and tap into youth potential towards advancement of peace, security and development.
Tweet
While member states have a role to play, the UN, African Union, Regional Economic Communities and Regional Mechanisms, development partners and youth equally have a support role to play where implementation ought not be based on a policy rush. Youth need to take ownership of the NAP of which they are the true custodians and which is there to serve them, by recognising their role and power, united. As said in Swahili, ‘umoja ni nguvu’ – unity is strength!
Karabo Mokgonyana is the first and former African Union Youth Ambassador for Peace for Southern Africa. She is a Legal and Development Practitioner that focuses on human rights protection, international trade and investment and peace and security. Emma Ng’ang’a is a Gender and Protection practitioner and the 1st former African Union Youth Ambassador for Peace – East Africa.
