Skip Navigation



African Affairs Advance Access published online on December 5, 2005
African Affairs, doi:10.1093/afraf/adi091
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
105/418/27    most recent
adi091v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fanthorpe, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author [2005]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Royal African Society. All rights reserved

Article

On the Limits of Liberal Peace: Chiefs and Democratic Decentralization in Post-War Sierra Leone

Richard Fanthorpe 1

1 Independent consultant and visiting research fellow at the Department of Anthropology, University of Sussex


  Abstract

Liberal peace, the explicit merging of international security and development policy, has arrived fairly late on the scene in Sierra Leone. One of its primary foci is regimes of customary governance and sociality associated with chiefdom administration. Many international agencies consider these regimes irredeemably oppressive towards the rural poor and a root cause of the recent civil war. While the present government of Sierra Leone remains supportive of chieftaincy, international donors are supporting a fast-track decentralization programme that, it is hoped, will supply a new system of democratic governance to a rural populace already straining against the leash of ‘custom’. This article, drawing upon the author’s recent fieldwork in Sierra Leone, undertakes a critical examination of this policy. It is argued that, popular grievances notwithstanding, chieftaincy is the historic focus of struggles for political control over the Sierra Leonean countryside. Both the national elite and the rural poor remain deeply engaged in these struggles, and many among the latter continue to value customary authority as a defence against the abuse of bureaucratic power. Fast-tracking decentralization in the war-ravaged countryside may therefore only succeed in shifting the balance of political power away from the poor.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.