Colonial and Post‐Colonial War Legitimization and Peace Process Efficacy: The Cases of Angola and Mozambique

Abstract

The paradox of war's legitimacy has long fueled debate over what constitutes a just cause. This article examines the evolving interpretation of just war through the lens of Africa's 20th‐century decolonization. It examines how struggles for national sovereignty raised questions about the legitimacy of newly formed governments and their ideologies, as well as the efficacy of peace processes facilitated by international bodies amid ongoing interference from former colonial powers in a state‐centric, ideologically divided world order. This article draws on the case studies of Mozambique and Angola to explore the complexities of legitimization. These countries were selected for two reasons: First, both countries share a recent history shaped by their (de)colonization struggle against the Portuguese. Second, parallels emerge in their post‐colonial power struggles and the peace processes that followed. Ultimately, this comparison intends to explain how the protagonists legitimized their struggles and assess the effectiveness of the United Nations' approach to these conflicts. The differing outcomes in these cases highlight the importance of context‐specific approaches and the critical role of adaptable international support. This exploratory study relies on qualitative methods, drawing data from archival sources, particularly official documents from the United Nations, the Organization of African Unity, and parties involved in the conflicts. The study also employs discourse analysis to examine the narratives developed by various protagonists in their quest to legitimize warfare and articulate grievances during negotiations.