Peace talks: Govt must seek LRA military wing
Oct 24, 2006
THE Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels last week killed about 40 civilians, two UPDF soldiers and destroyed six vehicles in Southern Sudan.
THE Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) rebels last week killed about 40 civilians, two UPDF soldiers and destroyed six vehicles in Southern Sudan.
The lesson from this is that the LRA cannot change their ways easily. Killing and maiming, which they have done for about two decades, are still their major characteristics.
The are two questions to ponder: Why did the LRA agreed to a negotiated settlement? Is the delegation in Juba still authentic and representative of LRM/A leadership’s minds?
Why did the LRA resume killing?
Security sources say that LRA’s allegation of “heavy†UPDF developments in Owiny Ki-Bul (assembly point) was a sign that LRA was quitting the talks.
UPDF deployed along the shores of River Nile, 200km from Owiny Ki Bul, following intelligence reports that Vincent Otti had ordered LRA fighters to cross River Nile and join him in Garamba National Park. To prevent this, UPDF deployed along the River Nile shores but south of Juba. To beat off this strategy, LRA fighters led by commanders Dominic Ongwen and Ceasar Accellam moved north of Juba in bid to cross the River Nile. But their presence was noticed when the warrior Mundari tribes attempted blocked their movement.
Use of diversionary tactics is a key factor in the military. Last week’s killings were meant to force SPLA and UPDF to remove their troops along the shores of River Nile and re-deploy them around Juba. This would enable Ongwen, one of five top LRA leaders indicted by the ICC, to cross to Western Equatoria State enroute to Garamba. Sources add that the killing of Capt. Sam Mugarura was meant to force Uganda to walk out of the peace process.
LRA ‘spokesman’ in Juba, Godfrey Ayoo, denied that the rebels were responsible for the latest killings: “We have checked with the LRA high command and those in the bush. The LRA hasn’t declared war on the people of South Sudan,†he said. He called for a parallel investigation by the Cessation of Hostilities Monitoring Team (CHMT) and the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS).
Ayoo’s response is significant. It means that the Juba talks have helped to transform LRA from the rogue gang of killers who were shunned by people to a group with ‘serious political programmes’ and whose spokesmen are accorded equal publicity with other power centres.
It is now apparent that the LRA has effectively used the Juba peace talks to regroup. Rebels fighters who had scattered or were in hiding due to UPDF operations in northern Uganda and Southern Sudan are now together and safer. The LRA wants get rid of the non-essential ‘personnel’ like women, children, sick soldiers and non-committed fighters. These categories of people are what the LRA leadership wants to go to the assembling points and surrender.
Why did LRA enter peace talks?
Prior to the talks, LRA fighters in northern Uganda under the command of the late Raska Lukwiya, Ongwen and Accellam found it difficult to linkup with their comrades in Garamba National Park.
It was also apparent that UPDF and SPLA were itching to cross into Garamba to hunt the rebels. Cornered and weakened, the LRA leadership accepted to enter into negotiations.
The US and Britain had significantly changed their view about the war. For example, Britain was pushing the UN Security Council to pass a resolution allowing a joint UN, UPDF, SPLA and Congolese Army operation against LRA in Garamba. The resolution, which has been delayed pending the outcome of Juba talks, also calls for indictment against supporters and funders of LRA. At the same time, ICC indicted LRA top leadership: Kony, Otti, Ongwen, Okot Odhiambo and the late Raska Lukwiya. These developments in New York and the Hague scared the LRM/A’s political leaders, sponsors and supporters in the UK, US, Germany and Kenya. This group wants to see the Juba talks succeed so that they survive the ICC hook.
For the indicted LRA leaders, the Juba talks were seen as avenue to argue for the lifting of ICC’s arrest warrants. This is the only thing that matters to them. Short of this, they would rather die fighting. Even the Matoput option is not acceptable to them because their victims in Uganda will not forgive them.
Blunders by Goss
The biggest blunder by the GoSS was the donation of US $20,000 and five tonnes of food to LRA in Nabanga in May 2006. GoSS Vice-President and mediator of the talks, Dr. Riek Machar, justified his donation by saying that it aimed to stop the rebels from killing Sudanese civilians and raiding villages for food. This was a big blunder because through airdrops from Khartoum, the LRA still gets arms, food and uniforms. These airdrops in Garamba were confirmed by Congo government and UN Observer Mission in Congo (MONUC).
As late as last week, with the knowledge of the mediators, food was being delivered to the LRA fighters who have refused to assemble in Owiny Ki Bul. Food should have been used as a weapon or a bargaining chip to make the rebels assemble and later surrender.
If Riek Machar said that he donated money and food to LRA in May 2006 in order to stop the killing of Sudanese civilians, what explanation is he giving for the killing of 41 Sudanese civilians last week?
It will not be a surprise if the LRA demands for more money and food from Riek Machar in order to halt the killing of Sudanese civilians.
Is the leadership still interested in the peace talks?
The LRA delegation in Juba as well as the LRA supporters in the diaspora was the peace talks. But for some local opposition politicians, President Museveni’s government must be toppled militarily. Such groups with subversive motives should be watched lest they ruin the Juba peace process.
The LRA leadership in Garamba is not interested in the Juba peace talks, but LRA supporters in northern Uganda, Juba, Nairobi, London and USA want peace at all costs. Government should speak to them. Of course, Otti will continue telephoning the various FM radio stations and friendly newspapers while masquerading as a person yearning for a peaceful solution to the war. But in reality, he is buying time.
The military and political climate in the DRC and Sudan has dramatically changed to favour the LRA leadership. They are not holed up in Garamba as Uganda often alleges. LRA exists and is organised. They have linked up with other Ugandan rebel groups like the ADF, NALU, WNBF and PRA, who have comfortably lived for years in war-torn northeastern Congo. Security sources say the Ugandan rebels have now agreed to form an umbrella body. This is why Ongwen and Accellam must lead the 200 fighters from the Juba zone to Garamba.
The alliance of the various Ugandan rebel groups in DR Congo has removed the fear of ICC from the indicted leaders. Consequently, the bulk of LRA fighters have moved out of Garamba southward to Ituri and parts of Equatoria forests. This makes it hard for a joint operation against them by the UN, UPDF, SPLA and Congolese army.
Lack of total governmental control in eastern DR Congo, save for major towns, also favours the rebel groups and enables them to roam the countryside undeterred. In DR Congo, LRA does not kill or ambush. It buys food and moves freely. The question is this: Where does it get the money to buy food? There is a high possibility that the money from GoSS and Khartoum has helped them to live ‘decently’.
There are indications that Khartoum authorities have returned to bed with Kony. This calls for Presidents Museveni and Salva Kiir to urgently employ the carrot and stick approach to the LRA issue.
The Congolese army
Human Right Watch (HRW), Amnesty International (AI) and Oxfam have written separate reports accusing the DR Congo army (FARDC) of being the leading human rights abuser in the country. In particular, a statement released last week by HRW depicts the soldiers in the country’s northeastern Ituri district as committing human rights abuses in exactly the same manner as the warlords and their militias. The HRW report said that, in collusion with their officers, some FARDC elements are abducting civilians and forcing them to work on plantations or in gold mines.
“Several witnesses describe how they were captured by soldiers who forced them to harvest and transport various goods. Threatened with death if they fail to obey, women and even children are forced to comply. For trying to defend the victims, a local chief was beaten and put in a hole used as an underground prison. Civilian and military authorities pretend not to see, saying that local militias alone are responsible for abducting civilians, a claim contradicted by several eyewitnesses and local human rights defenders,†the HRW report released yesterday says.
HRW said, “The question is whether MONUC, which has deployed in this province several peacekeepers to back the Congolese armed forces, is doing enough to have the Congolese government put an end to these exactions.â€
Investigations by several organisations, including Amnesty International and Oxfam, revealed that the armed militias, which have been terrorising the population, were using ammunition made in US, China, Russia or South Africa, in violation of the UN arms embargo.
Without the Congolese army out of control and without the slightest fear from MONUC, the LRA, ADF, PRA, FDLR have indeed found a safe haven in Dr Congo. Their only worry is how Ongwen and group can rejoin them.
This calls for Uganda and Rwanda to examine the issue of their strained relations, and exert pressure on the UN Security Council over the issue of allowing their troops on Congo soil. The government in Kinshasa is too weak to be relied on to end this confusion in northeastern Congo.
Khartoum and CPA implementation
Last week’s killings should serve as a warning. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between Khartoum and did not cover the LRA. Yet the Khartoum still needs LRA to disorganise Goss during the referendum in 2011. For example, the LRA recently boasted of acquiring new guns. Secondly, LRA is still receiving airdrops of supplies in Garamba.
The future of peace talks
The peace talks should continue. Government should not walk out of these talks. It must not quit Juba without achieving something. Quitting will be suicide. But GoU and GoSS should bear in mind that they are talking to the civilian wing of the LRA who are not representative of the military wing. Attempts should also be made to woo the military wing to meaningfully join the Juba talks.
The lesson from this is that the LRA cannot change their ways easily. Killing and maiming, which they have done for about two decades, are still their major characteristics.
The are two questions to ponder: Why did the LRA agreed to a negotiated settlement? Is the delegation in Juba still authentic and representative of LRM/A leadership’s minds?
Why did the LRA resume killing?
Security sources say that LRA’s allegation of “heavy†UPDF developments in Owiny Ki-Bul (assembly point) was a sign that LRA was quitting the talks.
UPDF deployed along the shores of River Nile, 200km from Owiny Ki Bul, following intelligence reports that Vincent Otti had ordered LRA fighters to cross River Nile and join him in Garamba National Park. To prevent this, UPDF deployed along the River Nile shores but south of Juba. To beat off this strategy, LRA fighters led by commanders Dominic Ongwen and Ceasar Accellam moved north of Juba in bid to cross the River Nile. But their presence was noticed when the warrior Mundari tribes attempted blocked their movement.
Use of diversionary tactics is a key factor in the military. Last week’s killings were meant to force SPLA and UPDF to remove their troops along the shores of River Nile and re-deploy them around Juba. This would enable Ongwen, one of five top LRA leaders indicted by the ICC, to cross to Western Equatoria State enroute to Garamba. Sources add that the killing of Capt. Sam Mugarura was meant to force Uganda to walk out of the peace process.
LRA ‘spokesman’ in Juba, Godfrey Ayoo, denied that the rebels were responsible for the latest killings: “We have checked with the LRA high command and those in the bush. The LRA hasn’t declared war on the people of South Sudan,†he said. He called for a parallel investigation by the Cessation of Hostilities Monitoring Team (CHMT) and the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS).
Ayoo’s response is significant. It means that the Juba talks have helped to transform LRA from the rogue gang of killers who were shunned by people to a group with ‘serious political programmes’ and whose spokesmen are accorded equal publicity with other power centres.
It is now apparent that the LRA has effectively used the Juba peace talks to regroup. Rebels fighters who had scattered or were in hiding due to UPDF operations in northern Uganda and Southern Sudan are now together and safer. The LRA wants get rid of the non-essential ‘personnel’ like women, children, sick soldiers and non-committed fighters. These categories of people are what the LRA leadership wants to go to the assembling points and surrender.
Why did LRA enter peace talks?
For the indicted LRA leaders, the Juba talks were seen as avenue to argue for the lifting of ICC’s arrest warrants. This is the only thing that matters to them. Short of this, they would rather die fighting. Even the Matoput option is not acceptable to them because their victims in Uganda will not forgive them.
Blunders by Goss
The biggest blunder by the GoSS was the donation of US $20,000 and five tonnes of food to LRA in Nabanga in May 2006. GoSS Vice-President and mediator of the talks, Dr. Riek Machar, justified his donation by saying that it aimed to stop the rebels from killing Sudanese civilians and raiding villages for food. This was a big blunder because through airdrops from Khartoum, the LRA still gets arms, food and uniforms. These airdrops in Garamba were confirmed by Congo government and UN Observer Mission in Congo (MONUC).
As late as last week, with the knowledge of the mediators, food was being delivered to the LRA fighters who have refused to assemble in Owiny Ki Bul. Food should have been used as a weapon or a bargaining chip to make the rebels assemble and later surrender.
If Riek Machar said that he donated money and food to LRA in May 2006 in order to stop the killing of Sudanese civilians, what explanation is he giving for the killing of 41 Sudanese civilians last week?
It will not be a surprise if the LRA demands for more money and food from Riek Machar in order to halt the killing of Sudanese civilians.
Is the leadership still interested in the peace talks?
The LRA delegation in Juba as well as the LRA supporters in the diaspora was the peace talks. But for some local opposition politicians, President Museveni’s government must be toppled militarily. Such groups with subversive motives should be watched lest they ruin the Juba peace process.
The LRA leadership in Garamba is not interested in the Juba peace talks, but LRA supporters in northern Uganda, Juba, Nairobi, London and USA want peace at all costs. Government should speak to them. Of course, Otti will continue telephoning the various FM radio stations and friendly newspapers while masquerading as a person yearning for a peaceful solution to the war. But in reality, he is buying time.
The military and political climate in the DRC and Sudan has dramatically changed to favour the LRA leadership. They are not holed up in Garamba as Uganda often alleges. LRA exists and is organised. They have linked up with other Ugandan rebel groups like the ADF, NALU, WNBF and PRA, who have comfortably lived for years in war-torn northeastern Congo. Security sources say the Ugandan rebels have now agreed to form an umbrella body. This is why Ongwen and Accellam must lead the 200 fighters from the Juba zone to Garamba.
The alliance of the various Ugandan rebel groups in DR Congo has removed the fear of ICC from the indicted leaders. Consequently, the bulk of LRA fighters have moved out of Garamba southward to Ituri and parts of Equatoria forests. This makes it hard for a joint operation against them by the UN, UPDF, SPLA and Congolese army.
Lack of total governmental control in eastern DR Congo, save for major towns, also favours the rebel groups and enables them to roam the countryside undeterred. In DR Congo, LRA does not kill or ambush. It buys food and moves freely. The question is this: Where does it get the money to buy food? There is a high possibility that the money from GoSS and Khartoum has helped them to live ‘decently’.
There are indications that Khartoum authorities have returned to bed with Kony. This calls for Presidents Museveni and Salva Kiir to urgently employ the carrot and stick approach to the LRA issue.
The Congolese army
Human Right Watch (HRW), Amnesty International (AI) and Oxfam have written separate reports accusing the DR Congo army (FARDC) of being the leading human rights abuser in the country. In particular, a statement released last week by HRW depicts the soldiers in the country’s northeastern Ituri district as committing human rights abuses in exactly the same manner as the warlords and their militias. The HRW report said that, in collusion with their officers, some FARDC elements are abducting civilians and forcing them to work on plantations or in gold mines.
“Several witnesses describe how they were captured by soldiers who forced them to harvest and transport various goods. Threatened with death if they fail to obey, women and even children are forced to comply. For trying to defend the victims, a local chief was beaten and put in a hole used as an underground prison. Civilian and military authorities pretend not to see, saying that local militias alone are responsible for abducting civilians, a claim contradicted by several eyewitnesses and local human rights defenders,†the HRW report released yesterday says.
HRW said, “The question is whether MONUC, which has deployed in this province several peacekeepers to back the Congolese armed forces, is doing enough to have the Congolese government put an end to these exactions.â€
Investigations by several organisations, including Amnesty International and Oxfam, revealed that the armed militias, which have been terrorising the population, were using ammunition made in US, China, Russia or South Africa, in violation of the UN arms embargo.
Without the Congolese army out of control and without the slightest fear from MONUC, the LRA, ADF, PRA, FDLR have indeed found a safe haven in Dr Congo. Their only worry is how Ongwen and group can rejoin them.
This calls for Uganda and Rwanda to examine the issue of their strained relations, and exert pressure on the UN Security Council over the issue of allowing their troops on Congo soil. The government in Kinshasa is too weak to be relied on to end this confusion in northeastern Congo.
Khartoum and CPA implementation
Last week’s killings should serve as a warning. The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between Khartoum and did not cover the LRA. Yet the Khartoum still needs LRA to disorganise Goss during the referendum in 2011. For example, the LRA recently boasted of acquiring new guns. Secondly, LRA is still receiving airdrops of supplies in Garamba.
The future of peace talks
The peace talks should continue. Government should not walk out of these talks. It must not quit Juba without achieving something. Quitting will be suicide. But GoU and GoSS should bear in mind that they are talking to the civilian wing of the LRA who are not representative of the military wing. Attempts should also be made to woo the military wing to meaningfully join the Juba talks.