The fragility agenda as a manifestation of global hierarchies

Why is it still relevant to probe the notion of fragility when the concept has been so heavily criticised? Because it continues to be used in policy on conflict, security and development.

This DIIS Working Paper explores how the concept of fragility has evolved and been adapted since the inception of the failed state concept in the 1990s to the current focus on fragile situations. The paper then argues that this reflects the vacuous character of the concept, which makes it politically flexible rather than a precise diagnostic tool. It provides justifications for interventions that are often prioritised due to the impact of fragile states on ‘our’ (Western) security.

Finally, we use the prism of Security Sector Reform to explore how the fragility agenda has framed interventions in two empirical cases, Somalia and Iraq.

Topics

Fragile states

Why is it still relevant to probe the notion of fragility? Because although the concept has been heavily criticised it continues to be widely used in policy on conflict, security and development. This brief traces the development of the fragile state concept to argue that it is tenacious precisely because it is analytically vacuous and malleable, rather than an accurate diagnostic tool. Although the concept might be politically useful for international donors, it is unhelpful for developing context-sensitive and targeted interventions.