The United States as a Third Party in the Civil War in Angola

Table of Contents

Introduction

Development

A. The role of a third party

B. Civil war in Angola

C. The US as an interested third party

D. Conflict resolution

D.1. A Transcend perspective

Conclusion

Research Objectives and Themes

This paper examines how the intervention of a third party, specifically the United States, can complicate the resolution of a conflict when the mediator's primary motivation is the pursuit of its own narrow self-interests.

• The theoretical role of third-party mediation in international conflicts.
• The historical and structural origins of the civil war in Angola.
• The impact of Cold War strategic interests on US foreign policy toward Angola.
• The challenges and limitations of conflict resolution in resource-driven wars.
• The dual role of the US as both a partisan supporter of UNITA and a mediator.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

Introduction: Provides an overview of the Angolan conflict as a struggle for independence evolving into an interstate war influenced by Cold War dynamics.

Development: Analyzes the theoretical framework of third-party intervention, the specific dynamics of the Angolan civil war, the US strategic involvement, and various perspectives on conflict resolution.

Conclusion: Summarizes how the US dual role as a partisan actor and mediator hindered peace efforts and contributed to the prolongation of the conflict.

Keywords

Angola, Civil War, United States, Third Party Intervention, Mediation, Cold War, Conflict Resolution, UNITA, MPLA, Foreign Policy, War Economy, Resource Rent, Strategic Interests, Diplomacy, Statecraft.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the central focus of this paper?

The paper focuses on the role of the United States as a third-party actor in the Angolan civil war and how its pursuit of narrow self-interest impeded the resolution of the conflict.

What are the core themes explored?

Key themes include the impact of international intervention on internal civil wars, the transformation of mediation into statecraft, the influence of resource-driven economies on conflict duration, and the duality of partisan support versus neutral mediation.

What is the primary research question?

The research asks how third-party intervention, specifically by the US, renders the resolution of a conflict more difficult when the mediator is primarily concerned with its own strategic objectives.

Which theoretical approach is used to analyze mediation?

The paper utilizes concepts from conflict resolution theory, including Galtung’s "Transcend" perspective, and theories regarding mediation as a purposive strategic behavior within foreign policy.

What topics are covered in the development section?

This section covers the role of intermediaries, the history of the Angolan conflict, the US's strategic objectives during the Cold War, the obstacles to achieving a ceasefire, and the failure of multiple peace agreements.

Which terms best characterize this work?

Key terms include international relations, post-colonial civil wars, foreign policy instruments, diplomatic recognition, and partisan mediation.

How did US recognition policy affect the peace process?

By withholding diplomatic recognition of the MPLA government for years and prioritizing support for UNITA, the US undermined the legitimacy of the government and prolonged the war, ultimately complicating the search for a diplomatic solution.

What role did natural resources play in the Angolan conflict?

Natural resources, particularly oil and diamonds, served as key revenue streams that incentivized both the government and rebel groups to continue fighting rather than pursuing peace, as war became more profitable than the outcomes of a potential negotiated settlement.

How does the author evaluate the effectiveness of the US as a peacemaker?

The author argues that while the US eventually acted as a necessary mediator, its effectiveness was primarily due to its significant leverage over the involved parties, despite its previous role in exacerbating the conflict through partisan support.