Why African Norms Matter: Subsidiarity and Agency in Peacemaking

Some studies have used the concept of norm antipreneurship to explain Africa’s contestation of attempts by the United Nations (UN) Security Council and the International Criminal Court (ICC) to implement international norms, particularly the responsibility to protect and anti-impunity norms. Others have applied the norm localization concept, assuming that the African Union (AU) is, or should be, a localizing agent, and subordinating African norms to their international counterparts. Drawing on concepts of norm subsidiarity, contested subsidiarity, and agency, I argue that the AU is a subsidiary agent and not a norm localizer. It has created African subsidiary norms on temporal immunity, the right to protect, and African sovereignty, allowing Africa to contest international equivalents, establish primacy, and advance its vital security interests. The AU rejects the UN Security Council’s and the ICC’s attempts to enforce international norms that are inconsistent with African norms addressing the same global issues.