Abstract

This article provided a comparative study of Liberia and Sierra Leone military reform and tried to understand the relationship and bridge the literature gap by interpreting the relationship between democratic governance and local ownership of (SSR). It adopts a comparative analysis and historical documentation as a research methodology to investigate the relevance of local ownership in democratic military governance during the SSR process. These nations have common backgrounds and experienced close-knit conflicts. Foreign-supported initiatives to reform the security sector were conducted in both countries after the civil conflict. These reforms viewed Liberia as an example showing inadequate local ownership, while more extensive ownership was seen in Sierra Leone compared to her neighbor. This article argues that outcomes that will establish democratic control and military oversight can result from activities where ownership is present or absent. As such, local ownership of SSR is relevant but not required for the development and consolidation of democratic control of the military. Hence, the study recommends that SSR should not be built on a rejection of local ownership realities because it leads to a non-consultative approach of reform and finally, this study concludes that local ownership may not be necessary for democratic governance in the military; however, it is necessary for sustainable democratic governance.

摘要

本文对利比里亚和塞拉利昂的军事改革进行了比较研究，试图通过解释民主治理与地方所有权（SSR）之间的关系来理解这种关系并弥合文献差距。它采用比较分析和历史文献作为研究方法，研究地方所有权在 SSR 过程中民主军事治理中的相关性。这些国家有着共同的背景，经历了密切的冲突。国内冲突后，两国都开展了外国支持的安全部门改革举措。这些改革将利比里亚视为当地所有权不足的一个例子，而与邻国相比，塞拉利昂的所有权更为广泛。本文认为，建立民主控制和军事监督的结果可能来自存在或不存在所有权的活动。因此，地方对 SSR 的所有权是相关的，但不是发展和巩固军队民主控制所必需的。因此，该研究建议 SSR 不应建立在拒绝地方所有权现实的基础上，因为这会导致改革的非协商方法，最后，本研究得出结论，地方所有权可能不是军队民主治理所必需的；然而，可持续的民主治理是必要的。SSR 的地方所有权是相关的，但不是发展和巩固军队民主控制所必需的。因此，该研究建议 SSR 不应建立在拒绝地方所有权现实的基础上，因为这会导致改革的非协商方法，最后，本研究得出结论，地方所有权可能不是军队民主治理所必需的；然而，可持续的民主治理是必要的。SSR 的地方所有权是相关的，但不是发展和巩固军队民主控制所必需的。因此，该研究建议 SSR 不应建立在拒绝地方所有权现实的基础上，因为这会导致改革的非协商方法，最后，本研究得出结论，地方所有权可能不是军队民主治理所必需的；然而，可持续的民主治理是必要的。