Journal of Defense Resources Management (Jan 2013)
WAR TERMINATION IN SOMALIA AND KENYA DEFENSE FORCES’ (KDF) ROLE
Abstract
War causes and conduct have fascinated war planners, war executors and scholars for a long time because little attention has been given to how wars are ended. This oversight is apparent not only in historical accounts of warfare but, more importantly, in contemporary analyses and doctrinal formulations of deterrence and overall defense policies. Just as historians have focused on how wars begin and are fought, military analysts and planners have concentrated on influencing the initiation and conduct of warfare rather than on analyzing the process and requirements for terminating warfare on acceptable terms and at acceptable costs. Conflict termination is the formal end of fighting, not the end of conflict. Despite the volumes of research and literature on the subject, belligerents mismanage war termination. The major objective of wartime strategy is defeating enemy arms as quickly as possible with the least cost in friendly casualties. As long as hostilities endure, diplomacy is subordinated to military requirements. War termination planning, as it is currently accomplished, takes the form of civil affair planning on the details of how the vanquished will be managed following the capitulation of the enemy and cessation of hostilities. We argue that Kenya Defence Forces (KDF) prudently terminated its war with the terrorists group Al-Shabaab that merged with Al-Qaeda when they agreed to be integrated into the African Union Mission for Somalia (AMISOM) which is backed up by the United Nations.
