6.1. The Concept of Regional Integration
6.1.1 Factors which Promote Integration
Like the concept of regional integration, there are equally many views which have been put across of what promotes or drives countries to enter into a regional integration or how an integration process can be regarded as successful. Some notable and interesting views come from scholars of international relations and are categorised in relation to the theoretical frameworks which inform the views.
Firstly, scholars from the realist paradigm argue that the state is the main and only player in international relations and that states will always pursue their own national interests.
Furthermore, realists argue that states will always struggle for power, and peace can only be achieved when there is a balance of power. This is the theory that has been used to explain the cold war dynamics. In this paradigm, realists and neo-realists who differ slightly in their understanding of the above tenets take the perspective that the existence of a hegemonic state in a region can serve as a strong motivation for countries to cooperate in a region. This view will be elaborated further in the discussion of how regional integration evolved in SADC. Realists
132
believe that because of the existence of a hegemonic state, countries enter into regional integration:
1. As a way of coming together to counter the power of the hegemony;
2. As an effort to restrict the free exercise of power by the hegemony through entrapping the hegemony under the control of the regional structures;
3. To band-wagon with the hegemony in order to get benefits of security when there are big power differences within the region; and
4. For entrapping potential rivals of a declining hegemony. (Hurrell, 1995:47)
For neo-realists, regional integration occurs in response to hegemonic power projections or when there is convergence of national interests. Neo-realists argue that the relationship between states in the international system is to a large extent influenced by the challenges they face as a result of the anarchic structure of the world order, and not their behaviour as individual units (Gabriel, 1994:14). In contrast, Ngoma (2005) has observed a departure by the SADC countries from the realist paradigm in that their relationship and efforts to pursue tighter relationships even when there are differences in how they deal with domestic issues do not conform to realist tenets (Ngoma, 2005:17). Ngoma points to a SADC that has a liberal persuasion, which will now be discussed.
The second perspective in the concept of regional integration is offered by neo-liberalists. This approach enables an understanding of how regional integration would survive in a global neo- liberal capitalist environment. According to Keohane and Ostrom (1994), in liberalism there is a possibility of interdependence of states in regional integration in order to counter the challenges caused by anarchy in the world. Neo-liberalists differ from realists and neo-realists in that neo- liberalists argue that even in an anarchic world order in which rational states self-govern there is the possibility that states can cooperate. The cooperation would be achieved through the development of institutions, norms and regimes. Neo-liberalists believe that the cooperation would be based on reciprocation. From the neo-liberal perspective, regional integration can be useful in explaining the rational response by states to the wave of globalisation as well as interdependence of states. Neo-liberalism argues for a pluralist approach to regional integration in which there is participation of civil society and non-state actors. By involving non-state actors,
133
neo-liberalism does not see states as the only players in the regional integration process (Keohane and Ostrom, 1994).
In the SADC, the regional integration has been shaped by regional politics and state elites. There has been limited participation of civil society and other actors which are not states though the SADC Treaty through Article 23 provides for the participation of non-governmental organisations in the integration process (SADCC, 1980:269). Integration in the SADC has been shaped by individual state’s domestic politics. On that, Mansfield and Milner (1997) have argued that the state should see regional integration as an effort towards maximising state welfare and furthering national interests. This is achieved through cooperation prescribed in the new international political and economic framework. (Mansfield and Milner, 1997:6). The idea that states enter into regional integration to maximise state welfare conforms to utilitarianism in ethics which argues for policies which lead to the greatest good to the greatest number of people.
Functionalism in international relations has also been used to explain regional integration.
Mitrany (1996), who is credited for coming up with functionalism, emphasises that there have to be clearly defined functional needs when creating an institution. Functionalism argues that the increase in economic activities in a region persuades states to cooperate and further allow their economies to be open for more activities under some form of trade liberalisation. It is the belief in functionalism that states realise increased benefits from such regional integration processes.
Functionalism assumes any political differences between states can be easily managed by establishing functional institutions. Through these institutions all the national interests of members are integrated to create a politically unified region. Functionalists regard economic structures or institutions as more important than the political structures in regional integration (Mitrany, 1996:72-73). In the SADC, collaboration has been more in political institutions than other institutions such as those for civil society and non-state actors.
Haas (1958), a neo-functionalist, came up with additional features to explain regional integration. In a complete departure from the realist state-centric picture, Haas argued that there will be a sense of movement in that increasing interdependence in a number of areas results in a
“spill-over effect in other areas”. The good result of the spill-over effect encourages governments to bring other issues in many more areas. The commitment of states starts to change, and the
134
region starts to be perceived as made up of powerful institutions. In furthering a military pluralist argument, Haas emphasised the addition of society elites (Haas, 1958: XIV). Haas (1958:5) however noted that the functionalist approach to regional integration was premised on the study of the process of regional integration in Europe. For the SADC, as will be discussed in the next section, integration was driven by security and political issues. The drive for economic development came later. There has however been limited participation of non-governmental or non-state actors and civil society.