Wednesday 11 December 2013

DISCUSS VIVIDLY AND CLEARLY DISTINGUISH BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND THE STATE



MEANING OF A STATE
            A state is a community of persons more or less numerous, permanently occupying a definite portion of territory, independent of external control, and possessing an organized government to which the great body of inhabitants render habitual obedience. According to Max Weber, a state can be seen as a human community that claims the monopoly of legitimate use of the physical force within a giving territory this is done to distinguish it from other definition. The state is therefore is seen as a form of association with spherical characteristics, and is charged with the responsibility of maintaining those condition of life for which the state came into existence.  States vary in shapes and sizes, cultures, forms of government, natural resources, language, etc. However, all states possess four elements: a) people, b) territory, c) government, and d) sovereignty. The absence of any of these elements will not make a state a state.
         POPULATION: People are the inhabitants of the state. It is the entire body of citizens of the state who are vested with political power for political purposes. There is no specific number of people required in order for a state to be considered as one. However, it is important that the number must be numerous enough to be self-sufficient and to defend themselves and small enough to be administered. To date, the smallest state in terms of population is Vatican City with 826 citizens, who are mostly clerics and some Swiss guards. On the other hand, China is the largest state with 1.3 billion populations. The Philippines is also fast growing state with 97,976,603 populations.
          TERRITORY: Territory is a fixed area or surface of the earth where the inhabitants of a state live and where they maintain a government of their own. There are three components of territory: a) the land mass otherwise known as the terrestrial domain, b) the internal and external waters, which make up the maritime and fluvial domain; and c) the air space above the land and waters, which is called the aerial domain. For the sake of practicality, a territory must neither be too big as to be difficult to administer and defend nor too small as to be unable to provide for the needs of the population. The smallest state is Vatican City. It spreads across 0.17 square miles or .43 square kilometer. It would actually fit in Rizal Park in Manila. The biggest state is Russia with its total land area of 6,592.735 square miles.
         GOVERNMENT: Government is the institution or aggregate of institutions by which an independent society makes and carries out those rules of action which are necessary to enable men to live in a social state, or which are imposed upon the people forming that society by those who possess the power or authority of prescribing them. (Bernas, 2007). Simply, it refers to the agency through which the will of the state is formulated, expressed and implemented. Government is different from administration although these two terms are often used interchangeably. Government refers to the institution while administration is the body of men running the government.
         SOVEREGNTY: Sovereignty is referred to as the supreme, absolute and uncontrollable power by which any state is governed. It has two manifestations: a) internal, which is the power of the State to rule within its territory; and b) external, which is the freedom of the State to carry out its activities without subjection to or control by other States. This is often called as independence.
MEANING OF GOVERNMENT
Government is a group of people that governs a community or unit. It sets and administers public policy and exercises executive, political and sovereign power through customs, institutions, and laws within a state. It is also an organization exerting centralized control over a community. Government has to do with the act of governing, the exercise of authority, the administration of laws and the direction and the direction of the affairs of a state. Government is organised into various structures and developed institution through which it operates.
            Quoting from prof. J. Isawa Elaigiwu and Habu Galadima in their work “system of government (1994:1)” defined government as the institution that has been entrusted with the responsibility of making rules and regulation for peace and order in the state, and also enforcing them, providing security and welfare and managing the day to day affairs of the country on behalf of the state. They went further to say that for any government to function properly like a human system they must have branches. These are the legislature (which make the laws), the executive (which enforces the laws) and the judiciary (which interprets the laws and adjudicates).  According to him government is that agency of the ruling class which is charge with the responsibility of exercising state power on behalf of the ruling class. In the course of its existence and the exercise of its functions, the government is organized into certain structures and develops various institutions through which its members operate. The existence of these institutions implies that government also develops rules, expectation, values and ethics on the basis of which it carries out its function or activities.
DISTINCTION BETWEEN STATE AND GOVERNMENT
            Government is one element of the state. It is the agency through which laws are made, enforced and those who violate laws (law offenders) are punished. It is the visible manifestation of state authority. It consists of all the persons, institutions and agencies through which the will of the state is expressed and carried out. A state is an organized political community occupying a certain territory. A government on the contrary is an organization that has the power to make and enforce laws for a definite territory. The word ‘govern’ has the meaning of ‘power to administrate’. Though the state speaks through the government, it is proper to differentiate between the two.
         The state has authority inherent in itself whereas the government has no inherent powers. The government gets its structure, authority and power from the Constitution of the State.
         The state is a larger entity that includes all the citizens while government is relatively a smaller unit that includes only those who are employed to perform its functions. We are all citizens of the state, but we are all not functionaries of the government. John Garner a onetime vice president of the United State writes that “government is an essential organ or agency of the state but it’s no more than a state itself than the board of directors of a corporation is itself to the corporation.”
         The idea of state is quite abstract. The government is the concretization of the idea of the state. We see the government, not the state.
         The state is a near permanent institution; this because the state does not die unless it is attacked and made a part of the other state. The government is temporary; it is so because it may change today’s rulers may not be tomorrow’s rulers. To put it the other way, the state may be the same everywhere whereas; the government may vary from one state to another. India, the United States, Nigeria, Great Britain and France for example, are all states. But the governments which work in these states may not be of the same type. In India and Great Britain there is a parliamentary government, whereas in the Nigeria, United States of America there is presidential government.
         The sovereign powers lay with the state; it is the state that is sovereign. The government only exercises its power. The government’s powers are delegated and derivative; the state’s powers are real and origin.
         The opposition to the state is different from the opposition of the government. We criticize the government but we can never condemn the state. The criticism of the state is a revolt but the criticism of the government is not a rebellion. We would never hear from an Indian that India is bad; but we usually hear that the policies of the Indian Government headed by a political party or a multitude of political parties are bad. It is a crime to condemn one’s state; it is a duty, in fact it is a right to criticize one’s government.
         The government is merely an element of the state. Government is one part of the state. It is a part of the whole (the state). As a part, the government is not greater than the whole. When we talk of the state, we talk of the population, the definite territory, the government and sovereignty. But when we talk of the government, we talk of one part, one element of the state.
         The state’s territory is always definite. It remains unchanged. Its boundaries remain where they are. The government’s territory is never permanent. Ibrahim babangida move our capital from Lagos to Abuja. The British governments had also changed their capitals to London during the World War II, fearing the German attack.
CONCLUSION
            Having discussed the meaning of the state and government, we can see that the state and government are not the same, though the government does everything on behalf of the state and is also an organ of the state. The government are a state agency which make laws, enforce them and punishes those who violate those laws.
REFRENCES
W. F. WILLOUGHBY (1996). THE GOVERNMENT OF MORDERN STATE. APPLETON CENTURY.
GARWAL. R (2000). THE POLITICAL THEORY. NEW DELHI: S CHAND & COMPANY LTD.
KUKAH ,M.H (1999). DEMOCRACY, STATE AND THE CIVIL SOCIETY. NIGERIA: SPECTRUM BOOKS LTD
















the role of au as ngo



INTRODUCTION
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have played a major role in pushing for sustainable development at the international level. Campaigning groups have been key drivers of inter-governmental negotiations, ranging from the regulation of hazardous wastes to a global ban on land mines and the elimination of slavery. But NGOs are not only focusing their energies on governments and inter-governmental processes. With the retreat of the state from a number of public functions and regulatory activities, NGOs have begun to fix their sights on powerful corporations - many of which can rival entire nations in terms of their resources and influence.
 In this paper will would be discussing  the role of African union (AU)a nongovernmental organization  as a peace keeping organization in international  conflict. The African Union (AU, or, in its other official languages, UA) is a union consisting of 54 African states. The only all-African state not in the AU is Morocco. The AU was established on 26 May 2001 in Addis Ababa and launched on 9 July 2002 in South Africa[7] to replace the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The most important decisions of the AU are made by the Assembly of the African Union, a semi-annual meeting of the heads of state and government of its member states. The AU's secretariat, the African Union Commission, is based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Definition of terms
Conflict
There is no generally acceptable definition of the term conflict. Conflict is defined as the pursuit of incompatible interests and goals by different groups. Armed conflict is the resort to the use of force and armed violence in the pursuit of incompatible and particular interests and goals. Conflict is by nature, an intrinsic and inevitable part of human existence. The original meaning of conflict as it was derived from the latin word which means to clash, or engage in a fight, a confrontation, between two or more parties aspiring towards competitive means or ends. Conflict may also be defined as a type of interaction that is characterized by antagonistic encounters or coalitions of interest, ideas, policy, programmes and persons or other entities. Dougherty and Zfaltzgraft (1997) see conflicts as situation in which one identified group of individuals being they ethnic, linguistic, cultural, political, socio-economic etc is in conscious opposition to one or more other human groups because of the pursuit of incompatible goals. It is a social problem. When these conflicts go across state borders, it is referred to as International Conflict.
Conflict resolution
Resolution, according to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, refers to the action of solving or settling problems, doubts, etc. Peace agreements are an integral part of conflict resolution. Without some form of agreement among the conflicting parties, it is hard to talk about conflict resolution. However, an agreement, even if implemented, may not be sufficient to establish a durable peace.  Peace requires more than an agreement among the parties. The peace agreement is, however, a necessary step to a lasting arrangement. Thus, we can preliminarily define as a situation where the conflicting parties enter into an agreement that solves their central incompatibilities, accept each other’s continued existence as parties and cease all violent action against each other. This means that conflict precedes conflict resolution.
NON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS
NGOs are legally constituted corporations created by natural or legal people that operate independently from any form of government. The term originated from the United Nations, and normally refers to organizations that are not a part of a government and are not conventional for-profit businesses. In the cases in which NGOs are funded totally or partially by governments, the NGO maintains its non-governmental status by excluding government representatives from membership in the organization. In the United States, NGOs are typically non-profit organizations. The term is usually applied only to organizations that pursue wider social aims that have political aspects, but are not openly political organizations such as political parties.
The number of NGOs operating in the United States is estimated at 1.5 million.[1] Russia has 277,000 NGOs. India is estimated to have had around 3.3 million NGOs in 2009, just over one NGO per 400 Indians, and many times the number of primary schools and primary health centres in India.

Theoretical Explanations for Conflict and Conflict Resolution
Peace and conflict studies are concerned with the transformation or resolution of conflict and the building of amicable and positive peace. However, successful and effective conflict resolution and transformation requires thorough and systematic understanding of the root or remote cause of the conflict, which would consequently provide the fundamental ground on which strategies for resolution, prevention, and intervention can be mapped-out by conflict resolution and negotiation experts,peaceresearchers,activists,agents,and/orconcernedinstitutions.Inorderto understand peace and conflict resolution mechanisms, it is important to look at the theories underpinning the subject. The theories must be such that they help in the understanding of the causes of conflicts.
AFRICAN UNION
The AU significantly departed from the OAU’s reluctance to intervene in states’ affairs. Indeed the AU embodies an interventionist and activist stance towards peacekeeping. It explicitly declares in its mandate that the organization will intervene in conflicts on the continent through peace Keeping Organizations, even when a peace agreement or cease-fire agreement is not in place. The AU is convinced that in certain conflict situations in Africa, it is not possible to negotiate peace agreements without first establishing a certain degree of stability. The organization once again departed from the position of the OAU, since the OAU intervened only in conflicts if they were invited by the parties to the conflict. In contrast with the OAU, the general belief of the AU is that the protection of civilians should not be sacrificed at the expense of sovereignty. Currently The AU significantly departed from the OAU’s reluctance to intervene in states’ affairs. Indeed the AU embodies an interventionist and activist stance towards peacekeeping. The AU is convinced that in certain conflict situations in Africa, it is not possible to negotiate peace agreements without first establishing a certain degree of stability. The organization once again departed from the position of the OAU, since the OAU intervened only in conflicts if they were invited by the parties to the conflict. In contrast with the OAU, the general belief of the AU is that the protection of civilians should not be sacrificed at the expense of sovereignty.

THE ROLE OF AFRICAN UNION IN THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION
Libya
The AU attempted to mediate in the early stages of the 2011 Libyan civil war, forming an ad hoc committee of five presidents (Congolese President Denis Sassou Nguesso, Malian President Amadou Toumani Touré, Mauritanian President Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, South African President Jacob Zuma, and Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni) to broker a truce. However, the beginning of the NATO-led military intervention in March 2011 prevented the committee from traveling to Libya to meet with Libyan leader and former head of the AU until 2010 Muammar Gaddafi. As a body, the AU sharply dissented from the United Nations Security Council's decision to create a no-fly zone over Libya,[31] though a few member states, such as Botswana, Gabon, Zambia,[  and others expressed support for the resolution.
As a result of Gaddafi's defeat at the Battle of Tripoli, the decisive battle of the war, in August 2011, the Arab League voted to recognise the anti-Gaddafi National Transitional Council as the legitimate government of the country pending elections, yet although the council has been recognised by several AU member states, including two countries that are also members of the Arab League, the AU Peace and Security Council voted on 26 August 2011 not to recognise it, insisting that a ceasefire be agreed to and a national unity government be formed by both sides in the civil war. A number of AU member states led by Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Rwanda requested that the AU recognise the NTC as Libya's interim governing authority, and several other AU member states have recognised the NTC regardless of the Peace and Security Council's decision. However, AU member states Algeria and Zimbabwe have indicated they will not recognise the NTC, and South Africa has expressed reservations as well.
On 20 September, the African Union officially recognised the National Transitional Council as the legitimate representative of Libya.
Interventions in support of constitutionality
Togo
In response to the death of Gnassingbé Eyadéma, President of Togo, on 5 February 2005, AU leaders described the naming of his son Faure Gnassingbé the successor as a military coup.[  Togo's constitution calls for the speaker of parliament to succeed the president in the event of his death. By law, the parliament speaker must call national elections to choose a new president within sixty days. The AU's protest forced Gnassingbé to hold elections. Under heavy allegations of election fraud, he was officially elected President on 4 May 2005.
Mauritania
On 3 August 2005, a coup in Mauritania led the African Union to suspend the country from all organisational activities. The Military Council that took control of Mauritania promised to hold elections within two years.[citation needed] These were held in early 2007, the first time that the country had held elections that were generally agreed to be of an acceptable standard. Following the elections, Mauritania's membership of the AU was restored. However, on 6 August 2008, a fresh coup overthrew the government elected in 2007. The AU once again suspended Mauritania from the continental body.
Regional conflicts and military interventions
One of the objectives of the AU is to "promote peace, security, and stability on the continent".[50] Among its principles is 'Peaceful resolution of conflicts among Member States of the Union through such appropriate means as may be decided upon by the Assembly'.[51] The primary body charged with implementing these objectives and principles is the Peace and Security Council. The PSC has the power, among other things, to authorise peace support missions, to impose sanctions in case of unconstitutional change of government, and to "take initiatives and action it deems appropriate" in response to potential or actual conflicts. The PSC is a decision-making body in its own right, and its decisions are binding on member states.
Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act, repeated in article 4 of the Protocol to the Constitutive Act on the PSC, also recognises the right of the Union to intervene in member state in circumstances of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. Any decision to intervene in a member state under article 4 of the Constitutive Act will be made by the Assembly on the recommendation of the PSC.
Since it first met in 2004, the PSC has been active in relation to the crises in Darfur, Comoros, Somalia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Burundi, Côte d'Ivoire and other countries. It has adopted resolutions creating the AU peacekeeping operations in Somalia and Darfur, and imposing sanctions against persons undermining peace and security (such as travel bans and asset freezes against the leaders of the rebellion in Comoros). The Council is in the process of overseeing the establishment of a "standby force" to serve as a permanent African peacekeeping force.
In response to the ongoing Darfur conflict in Sudan, the AU has deployed 7,000 peacekeepers, many from Rwanda and Nigeria, to Darfur. While a donor's conference in Addis Ababa in 2005 helped raise funds to sustain the peacekeepers through that year and into 2006, in July 2006 the AU said it would pull out at the end of September when its mandate expires.] Critics of the AU peacekeepers, including Dr. Eric Reeves, have said these forces are largely ineffective due to lack of funds, personnel, and expertise. Monitoring an area roughly the size of France has made it even more difficult to sustain an effective mission. In June 2006, the United States Congress appropriated US$173 million for the AU force. Some, such as the Genocide Intervention Network, have called for United Nations (UN) or NATO intervention to augment and/or replace the AU peacekeepers. The UN has considered deploying a force, though it would not likely enter the country until at least October 2007. The under-funded and badly equipped AU mission was set to expire on 31 December 2006 but was extended to 30 June 2007 and merged with the United Nations African Union Mission in Darfur in October 2007. In July 2009 the African Union ceased cooperation with the International Criminal Court, refusing to recognize the international arrest warrant it had issued against Sudan's leader, Omar al-Bashir, who was indicted in 2008 for War crimes
From the early 1990s up until recently, Somalia was without a functioning central government. A peace agreement aimed at ending the civil war that broke out following the collapse of the Siad Barre regime was signed in 2006 after many years of peace talks. However, the new government was almost immediately threatened by further violence. To temporarily shore up the government's military base, starting in March 2007, AU soldiers began arriving in Mogadishu as part of a peacekeeping force that was intended by the AU to eventually be 8,000 strong.[56] Eritrea recalled its ambassadors to the African Union on 20 November 2009[57] after the African Union called on the United Nations Security Council to impose sanctions on them due to their alleged support of Somali Islamists attempting to topple the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, the internationally recognized government of Somalia which holds Somalia's seat on the African Union.[  On 22 December 2009, the Security Council passed UNSCR 1907, which imposed an arms embargo on Eritrea, travel bans on Eritrean leaders, and asset freezes on Eritrean officials. Eritrea strongly criticized the resolution. In January 2011, Eritrea reestablished their mission to the AU in Addis Ababa.
AU and conflict resolution in Kenya’s crisis of 2007–2008
The general political discussions, conflict resolution, and peace analyses regarding Kenya’s crisis clearly reveal that the AU“as a body” did not participate or involve itself in the conflict resolution and mediation processes in Kenya. Rather, Ghana’s John Kufuor,“probably” based on his position as the Chairman of the AU, former individual heads of states, and other prominent or influential Africans in their personal capacity; and the East African Community (not as a body) together with diplomats from the United States and the European Union were involved in the conflict resolution and mediation process in Kenya. Therefore, it is difficult to identify the specific role played by the AU (as a body) in the resolution of Kenya’s crisisof2007–2008.However,thepartplayedbytheAUmembers,particularlythe AU Chairman John Kufuor, in an attempt by the international community to resolve the crisis will be examined.
CONCLUSION
This article has explored the role of the AU in regional conflict resolution and dispute settlement. The introduction provides a glimpse into the historical origins as well as the normative and institutional structure of the AU. The AU was seen as a slave of time. It was created at a period when nationalism and sovereign integrity of states were the foremost concepts in international relations-especially for African states which were emerging from colonial subjugation. The AU thus assimilated and entrenched these concepts into its architectural foundation. Its unprecedented attempt to nullify the military coup in Sierra Leone has been viewed as an attempt on the part of the AU to come to terms with the changing realities of inter-state relations.

Alist air, B. 2007. Part of African Union Condemns Zimbabwe, About.com: African
History. http://www.africanhistory.about.com/b/a/232701.htm (accessed December 19,
2009).
Bany a, N. 2008. Zimbabwe Crisis Talks to Start with South Africa, Reuters. http://uk.
news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080722/tpl-uk-zimbabwe-crisis-c3c492c.html (accessed September
22, 2009).
Baras, L. and R. Omba ka. 2008. “End of Tumoil in Sight as AU Boss Jets in.” Daily
Nation. January 8.
BBC News. 2008a. Country Profile: Zimbabwe. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/
country_profiles/1064589.stm (accessed December 9, 2009).
BBC News. 2008b. Kenya Rivals Agree to Share Power, February 28, http://news.bbc.co.
uk/1/hi/world/Africa/7268903.stm (accessed January 14, 2009).
Burton , J. 1990a. Conflict: Basic Human Needs. New York: St. Martins Press.
Burton , J. 1990b. Conflict: Resolution and Prevention. New York: St. Martins Press.
Burton , J. 1997. Violence Experienced: The Source of Conflict Violence and Crime and
Their Prevention. New York: Manchester University Press.
Burton , J.2009.“ConflictResolution:TheHumanDimension,”TheInternationalJournal
of Peace Studies. http://www.gmu.edu/academic/ijps/vol3_1/burton.htm (accessed
February 10, 2009).