Gefährliche Davids. Wie schwache Staaten ihre Nachbarn bedrohen

Dangerous Davids. How weak states threaten their neighbors

Zusammenfassung

Seit einiger Zeit werden fragile und zerfallene Staaten als Bedrohung der internationalen Sicherheit angesehen. Dabei bleibt jedoch unklar, ob diese Staaten auch die Sicherheit ihrer Nachbarländer bedrohen. Während Ansätze aus der Realistischen Schule diese Frage eher verneinen, lässt sich auch eine gegenteilige Antwort geben, die in der Tendenz von Bürgerkriegen zur geographischen Ausweitung eine Gefahr für die Region sieht. Der Artikel kontrastiert diese beiden Perspektiven und entwickelt daraus Hypothesen, wie sich Staaten in der Nachbarschaft eines fragilen Staates diesem gegenüber verhalten werden.

Abstract

For some time, fragile and failed states are presented as threats to international security. What remains unclear is whether these states also represent a threat to the security of their immediate neighbors. While the Realist School would tend to answer this question in the negative, an alternative viewpoint can plausibly be constructed by reference to the tendency of civil wars to spill across borders. This article contrast these two perspectives and develops hypotheses about the behavior of states that are in the vicinity of a fragile state.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Fragile Staatlichkeit bedeutet im Kontext dieses Artikels, dass der Staat deutliche Defizite (a) in der internen Gewaltkontrolle, (b) in der Setzung und Durchsetzung von Recht, sowie (c) in der Erhebung von Abgaben aufweist. Staatszerfall ist dabei ein Spezialfall von Fragilität, in dem der Staat keine oder nur noch sehr geringe Kapazitäten in diesen drei Bereichen aufweist (Lambach 2008).

  2. 2.

    Dass die Unterteilung der Welt in „Nord“ und „Süd“ vor dem Hintergrund der wirtschaftlichen und politischen Entwicklung der letzten zwei Jahrzehnte viel von seiner ohnehin nur geringen Trennschärfe verloren hat, ist mir durchaus bewusst. Angeichts der noch größeren Undeutlichkeiten alternativer Begriffe wie „Erste“ bzw. „Dritte Welt“ (Menzel 2003) verwende ich dennoch den Begriff des Südens, um damit Entwicklungs- und Schwellenländer in Asien, Afrika und Lateinamerika zu bezeichnen.

  3. 3.

    Darüber hinaus gibt es Anzeichen, dass Staaten, die sich in einem Bürgerkrieg befinden, besonders häufig in zwischenstaatliche Konflikte verwickelt sind (Gleditsch et al. 2008).

  4. 4.

    Neuere Konzepte argumentieren dagegen, dass „staatsfreie Räume“ alles andere als gewaltoffen sind, sondern durch ein Vielzahl von Governance-Akteuren strukturiert werden (Risse/Lehmkuhl 2006, Clements et al. 2007).

Literatur

  1. Anter, A. (1996). Max Webers Theorie des modernen Staates. Herkunft, Struktur und Bedeutung. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arreguín-Toft, I. (2005). How the Weak Win Wars. A Theory of Asymmetric Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ayoob, M. (1995). The Third World Security Predicament. State Making, Regional Conflict, and the International System. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ayoob, M. (1998). Subaltern Realism. International Relations meets the Third World. In S.G. Neuman (Hrsg.), International Relations Theory and the Third World. Houndmills, London: Macmillan, 31–54.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Azar, E.E. & Moon, C. (1988). Legitimacy, Integration and Policy Capacity. The ‘Software’ Side of Third World National Security. In E.E. Azar & C. Moon (Hrsg.), National Security in the Third World. The Management of Internal and External Threats. Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 77–101.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bilgin, P. & Morton, A.D. (2002). Historicising Representations of ‘Failed States’. Beyond the Cold-War annexation of the social sciences? Third World Quarterly, 23 (1), 55–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Braithwaite, A. (2006). Location, Location, Location…. Identifying hot spots of international conflict. International Interactions, 31 (2), 251–273.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brown, M.E. (1996). Introduction. In M.E. Brown (Hrsg.), The International Dimensions of Internal Conflict. Cambridge, London: MIT Press, 1–31.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Buzan, B. (1997). Rethinking Security after the Cold War. Cooperation and Conflict, 32 (1), 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Buzan, B., Wæver, O. & Wilde, J. de (1998). Security. A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Callaghy, T. (1987). The State as Lame Leviathan. The Patrimonial Administrative State in Africa. In Z. Ergas (Hrsg.), The African State in Transition. Houndmills: Macmillan, 87–116.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Caplan, R. (2007). From Collapsing States to Neo-Trusteeship. The Limits to Solving the Problem of ‘Precarious Statehood’ in the 21st Century. Third World Quarterly, 28 (2), 231–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Carey, S. (2003). Guerilla Warfare in Sub-Saharan Africa, 1970–1995. Paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions, Edinburgh, 28. März - 2. April 2003.

  14. Clapham, C. (Hrsg.) (1982). Private Patronage and Public Power. Political Clientelism in the Modern State. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Clements, K.P., Boege, V., Brown, A., Foley, W. & Nolan, A. (2007). State Building Reconsidered. The Role of Hybridity in the Formation of Political Order. Political Science, 59 (1), 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Cliffe, L. (1999). Regional Dimensions of Conflict in the Horn of Africa. Third World Quarterly, 20 (1), 89–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Collier, P., Elliott, L., Hegre, H., Hoeffler, A., Reynal-Querol, M. & Sambanis, N. (2003). Breaking the Conflict Trap. Civil war and development policy. Washington D.C.: World Bank Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Daase, C. (1993). Regionalisierung der Sicherheitspolitik. Eine Einführung. In C. Daase, S. Feske, B. Moltmann, C. Schmid (Hrsg.), Regionalisierung der Sicherheitspolitik. Tendenzen in den internationalen Beziehungen nach dem Ost-West-Konflikt. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 67–88.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Daase, C. (1999). Kleine Kriege – große Wirkung. Wie unkonventionelle Kriegsführung die internationale Politik verändert. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Davis, D.R. & Moore, W.H. (1997). Ethnicity Matters. Transnational Ethnic Alliances and Foreign Policy Behaviour. International Studies Quarterly, 41 (1), 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. De Waal, A. (2000). Who Fights? Who Cares? War and Humanitarian Action in Africa. Trenton, Asmara: Africa World Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Debiel, T., Klingebiel, S., Mehler, A. & Schneckener, U. (2005). Zwischen Ignorieren und Intervenieren. Strategien und Dilemmata externer Akteure in fragilen Staaten. Stiftung Entwicklung und Frieden, Policy Paper 23. Bonn.

  23. Ellis, S. (1999). The Mask of Anarchy. The destruction of Liberia and the religious dimension of an African civil war. London: Hurst & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Elwert, G. (1997). Gewaltmärkte. Beobachtungen zur Zweckrationalität der Gewalt. In T. von Trotha (Hrsg.), Soziologie der Gewalt. Sonderheft 37 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 86–101.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fazal, T.M. (2004). State Death in the International System. International Organization, 58 (2), 311–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fearon, J.D. & Laitin, D.D. (2003). Ethnicity, Insurgency and Civil War. American Political Science Review, 97 (1), 75–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fund for Peace (2008). The Failed States Index 2008. Foreign Policy, 197, 64–68.

  28. Gleditsch, K.S. (2007). Transnational Dimensions of Civil War. Journal of Peace Research, 44 (3), 293–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gleditsch, K.S., Salehyan, I. & Schultz, K. (2008). Fighting at Home, Fighting Abroad. How Civil Wars Lead to International Disputes. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 52 (4), 479–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Goldstone, J.A. (2000): State Failure Task Force Report. Phase III findings. McLean: Science Applications International Corporation.

  31. Gurr, T.R. (2000). People Versus States. Minorities at Risk in the New Century. Washington D.C.: US Institute of Peace Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hansen, L. (2006). Security as Practice. Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hentz, J.J. (2004). State Collapse and Regional Contagion in Sub-Saharan Africa. Lessons for Zimbabwe. Scientia Militaria, 32 (1), 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Herbst, J. (2000). States and Power in Africa. Comparative lessons in authority and control. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Herbst, J. (2004). African Militaries and Rebellion. The Political Economy of Threat and Combat Effectiveness. Journal of Peace Research, 41 (3), 357–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Herz, J. (1950). Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma. World Politics, 2 (2), 157–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hill, J. (2005). Beyond the Other? A postcolonial critique of the failed state thesis. African Identities, 3 (2), 139–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hill, S. & Rothchild, D. (1987). The Contagion of Political Conflict in Africa and the World. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30 (4), 716–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hill, S. & Rothchild, D. (1993). The Impact of Regime on the Diffusion of Political Conflict. In M.I. Midlarsky (Hrsg.), The Internationalization of Communal Strife. London, New York: Routledge, 189–206.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Huxley, T. (2002). Disintegrating Indonesia? Implications for Regional Security. Adelphi Paper 349. London.

  41. Jackson, R. (2001). The State and Internal Conflict. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 55 (1), 65–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Jackson, R. (2002). Violent Internal Conflict and the African State. Towards a framework for analysis. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 29 (1), 29–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Jackson, R.H. (1990). Quasi-States. Sovereignty, international relations and the Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Job, B.L. (1992). The Insecurity Dilemma. National, Regime, and State Securities in the Third World. In B.L. Job (Hrsg.), The Insecurity Dilemma. National security of Third World states. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner, 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Kasfir, N. (2004). Domestic Anarchy, Security Dilemmas, and Violent Predation. In R.I. Rotberg (Hrsg.), When States Fail. Causes and Consequences. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 53–76.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Khosla, D. (1999). Third World States as Intervenors in Ethnic Conflicts. Implications for Regional and International Security. Third World Quarterly, 20 (6), 1143–1156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Krasner, S.D. & Pascual, C. (2005). Addressing State Failure. Foreign Affairs, 84 (4), 153–163.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Lake, D. & Rothchild, D. (Hrsg.) (1998). The International Spread of Ethnic Conflict. Fear, diffusion, and escalation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Lambach, D. & Debiel, T. (i.E.): State Failure and State Building. In M. Dunn, V. Mauer (Hrsg.), The Routledge Handbook of Security Studies. Oxford: Routledge, i.E.

  50. Lambach, D. (2006). Security, Development and the Australian Security Discourse. Australian Journal of Political Science, 41 (3), 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Lambach, D. (2008). Staatszerfall und regionale Sicherheit. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Levy, J.S. (2004). What Do Great Powers Balance Against and When? In T.V. Paul, J.J. Wirtz & M. Fortmann (Hrsg.), Balance of Power. Theory and Practice in the 21st Century. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 29–51.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Li, R. & Thompson, W. (1975). The ‘Coup Contagion’ Hypothesis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 19 (1), 63–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Lippmann, W. (1943). U.S. Foreign Policy. Shield of the Republic. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Mearsheimer, J.J. (1990). Back to the Future. Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security, 15 (1), 5–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mehler, A. (2003). Legitime Gewaltoligopole – eine Antwort auf strukturelle Instabilität in Westafrika? Hamburg: Focus Afrika IAK-Diskussionsbeiträge Nr. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Menzel, U. (2003). Comeback der drei Welten. Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, 12 / 2003, 1453–1461.

  58. Migdal, J.S. (1988). Strong Societies and Weak States. State-Society relations and State Capabilities in the Third World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Münkler, H. (2002). Die neuen Kriege. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Myrdal, G. (1968). Asian Drama. An Inquiry into the Poverty of Nations. 3 Bde. New York: Pantheon.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Neuman, S.G. (1998). International Relations Theory and the Third World. An Oxymoron? In S.G. Neuman (Hrsg.), International Relations Theory and the Third World. Houndmills, London: Macmillan, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Organski, A.F. & Kugler, J. (1978). Davids and Goliaths. Predicting the Outcomes of International Wars. Comparative Political Studies, 11 (2), 141–180.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Piazza, J.A. (2007). Draining the Swamp. Democracy Promotion, State Failure, and Terrorism in 19 Middle Eastern Countries. Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 30 (6), 521–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Posen, B. (1993). The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict. In M.E. Brown (Hrsg.), Ethnic Conflict and International Security. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 103–124.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Reno, W. (2000). Shadow States and the Political Economy of Civil Wars. In M. Berdal, D.M. Malone (Hrsg.), Greed and Grievance. Economic Agendas in Civil Wars. Boulder, London: Lynne Rienner, 43–68.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Risse, T. & Lehmkuhl, U. (2006). Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood – New Modes of Governance? Research Program of the Research Center (SFB) 700. Berlin: Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood Working Paper 1, December 2006.

  67. Rotberg, R.I. (2004). The Failure and Collapse of Nation-States. Breakdown, Prevention, and Repair. In R.I. Rotberg (Hrsg.), When States Fail. Causes and consequences. Princeton, Oxford: Princeton University Press, 1–49.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Rothchild, D., Deng, F.M., Zartman, I.W., Kimaro, S. & Lyons, T. (1996). Sovereignty as Responsibility. Conflict Management in Africa. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Rothstein, H.S. (2007). Less is More. The Problematic Future of Irregular Warfare in an Era of Collapsing States. Third World Quarterly, 28 (2), 275–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Salehyan, I. & Gleditsch, K.S. (2006). Refugees and the Spread of Civil War. International Organization, 60 (2), 335–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Salomon, K. (2005). Instabile Staatlichkeit am Beispiel Senegal. Rebellenkonflikte und die Handlungsautonomie des Staates. Marburg: Tectum.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sambanis, N. (2001). Do Ethnic and Nonethnic Civil Wars Have the Same Causes? A theoretical and empirical inquiry (Part I). Journal of Conflict Resolution, 45 (3), 259–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Schmeidl, S. (2002). (Human) Security Dilemmas. Long-Term Implications of the Afghan Refugee Crisis. Third World Quarterly, 23 (1), 7–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Schmidinger, T. (2006). Tschad vs. Sudan. Plündern und Herrschen. Blätter für deutsche und internationale Politik, 3 / 2006, 285–288.

  75. Schneckener, U. (2006). States at Risk. Zur Analyse fragiler Staatlichkeit. In U. Schneckener (Hrsg.), Fragile Staatlichkeit. „States at Risk“ zwischen Stabilität und Scheitern. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 9–40.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Simons, A. & Tucker, D. (2007). The Misleading Problem of Failed States. A ‘Socio-geography’ of Terrorism in the post-9 / 11 Era. Third World Quarterly, 28 (2), 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Smith, S. (2000). The Increasing Insecurity of Security Studies. Conceptualizing security in the last twenty years. In S. Croft, T. Terriff (Hrsg.), Critical Reflections on Security and Change. London, Portland: Frank Cass, 72–101.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Sørensen, G. (2000). States are not ‘Like Units’. Types of State and Forms of Anarchy in the Present International System. In M. Albert, L. Brock, K.-D. Wolf (Hrsg.), Civilizing World Politics. Society and Community beyond the State. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 103–117.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Sørensen, G. (2001). Changes in Statehood. The Transformation of International Relations. Houndmills, New York: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Vasquez, J.A. (1993). Factors Related to the Contagion and Diffusion of International Violence. In M.I. Midlarsky (Hrsg.), The Internationalization of Communal Strife. London, New York: Routledge, 149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Waltz, K.N. (1959). Man, the State, and War. A theoretical analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Waltz, K.N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

  83. Weber, M. (1972). Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft. Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Wohlforth, W.C, Little, R., Kaufman, S.J., Kang, D., Jones, C.A., Hui, V.T., Eckstein, A., Deudney, D & Brenner, W.L. (2007). Testing Balance-of-Power Theory in World History. European Journal of International Relations, 13 (2), 155–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Wyn Jones, R. (1999). Security, Strategy, and Critical Theory. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Zartman, I.W. (1995). Introduction. Posing the problem of state collapse. In I.W. Zartman (Hrsg.), Collapsed States. The Disintegration and Restoration of Legitimate Authority. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 1–11.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dr. Daniel Lambach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lambach, D. Gefährliche Davids. Wie schwache Staaten ihre Nachbarn bedrohen. ZS Aussen Sicherh. Polit. 2, 193–211 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12399-009-0024-3

Download citation

Schlüsselwörter

  • Staatszerfall
  • Sicherheitstheorie
  • Regionale Sicherheit
  • Konflikteskalation

Keywords

  • Failed states
  • Security theory
  • Regional security
  • Conflict spillover