Proxy Wars: The Hidden Dangers To Global Stability

Proxy wars, a phenomenon where ex­ternal powers support opposing sides in a conflict in order to influence the outcome of the conflict and advance their own strategic interests, have become a defining feature in geopoli­tics. From the Middle East to Eastern Europe and Africa, these conflicts are destabilizing regions, causing extrem­ism and threatening global security.

Proxy wars have been waged for de­cades. Some medieval states like the Byzantine Empire used proxy war as a foreign policy tool by deliberately culti­vating intrigue among rivals and then backing them when they went to war with each other. The Ottoman Empire likewise used the Barbary pirates as proxies to harass Western European powers in the Mediterranean Sea. The prevalence of proxy wars have increased significantly since the Arab spring. Regional powers and global players, including the United States, Russia, China and Saudi Arabia have exploited local conflicts to further their interests. Since the early twen­tieth century, proxy wars have taken the form of states assuming the role of sponsors to non-state proxies and using them as fifth columns to under­mine adversarial powers. This type of proxies involves external support for a faction engaged in a civil war, terror­ists, national liberation movements and insurgent groups. An example of this is when the British government partially organized and instigated the Arab revolt to undermine the Ot­toman Empire during the First World War. Since the Spanish civil war, which pitted the fascist political idea of Italy and Nazi Germany against the com­munist ideology of the Soviet Union without involving these states in open warfare with each other, many proxy wars began assuming a distinctive ideological dimension.

The Cold War era brought about several proxy wars including Ango­la, Nicaragua and Afghanistan. In An­gola, the US and Soviet Union backed opposing factions. In Nicaragua, the US supported contra rebels against the Sandinista government in the 1980s. While the US backed mujahideen fighters until 1989. In the post Cold War era, proxy wars persisted as re­gional factions in the Balkans received support from external powers during the 1990s. The Middle East saw Iran and Saudi Arabia backing opposing groups Iraq and Lebanon.

Proxy wars still exist in the mod­ern geopolitical landscape. These conflicts continue to have devastating effects. The Syrian civil war, on-going since 2011, is an example of complex nature of proxy wars. Russia and Iran support the Assad regime, while the US, Turkey, and the Gulf states back various rebel groups. This multilay­ ered conflict has caused immense human suffering, displacement and regional instability. Similarly, the conflict in Yemen, beginning in 2015, has pitted Saudi Arabia and the UAE against Iran backed Houthi rebels. In Eastern Europe, the conflict in Ukraine involves Russia backed sep­aratists and Ukrainian government forces. In Africa, Libya’s on-going con­flict features rival factions backed by external powers. This instability has caused extremism, human trafficking and regional insecurity. The on-going conflict in Afghanistan, lasting de­cades involves the US, NATO, and the Afghan government forces against the Taliban and other extremist groups.

Proxy wars have serious conse­quences not only on the affected region but on global stability. The human cost is staggering, claiming countless lives, displacing millions and destroying in­frastructure. The Syrian conflict has left millions of people internally dis­placed, whilst the Yemen conflict has left millions facing famine and chol­ era. Extremist groups thrive in this chaotic environment. Syria’s conflict has enabled ISIS and Al-Qaeda to flour­ish, while Libya’s power vacuum has empowered extremist groups. These conflicts disrupt global trade, trigger economic sanctions and increase re­cession risks. Proxy wars undermine international laws as external powers prioritize interests over humanitarian concerns.

The international community has utilized various strategies to address proxy wars, with mixed results. Dip­lomatic efforts play a crucial role in promoting dialogue and ceasefires. The United Nations(UN) utilizes spe­cial envoys, mediation teams, UN Secu­rity Council resolutions, and General Assembly initiatives. Regional organi­zations like the European Union (EU), African Union(AU), and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) also engage in conflict resolution. Humani­tarian aid also provides essential assis­tance through organizations like the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and non-govern­mental organizations (NGOs).

Economic sanctions aim to curb the influence of the individuals fuel­ling the proxy wars. However, there is doubt over the effectiveness of the sanctions. History has shown that economic sanctions can go wrong, causing harm to civilian population and strengthening authoritarian re­gimes. We can look at examples like the sanctions on Iraq in 1990 which led to widespread poverty and humani­tarian crises. The long standing US embargo on Cuba (1960 – present). To attain the desired results, sanctions should be carefully targeted, regular­ly reviewed, and complemented with diplomatic efforts.

Proxy wars pose significant threats to global stability and humanitarian security. The complexities of these conflicts require collective action, dip­lomatic solutions and international cooperation. The devastating human­itarian consequences of proxy wars are evident with millions displaced and countless lives lost. The interna­tional community must deploy differ­ent conflict resolution mechanisms to address these conflicts. Humanitarian aid and support for affected popula­tions are also crucial. Empowering local communities is essential for sustainable conflict resolution. Their intimate knowledge of the conflict’s complexities and ability to facilitate dialogue make them critical actors. Ultimately, addressing proxy wars re­quires a multifaceted approach that prioritizes humanitarian concerns, diplomatic solutions and internation­al cooperation.

* Melchizedek is NYSC member at Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution