There’s hope in the peace talks
Dec 16, 2007
EDITOR—I have been following the progress of the peace talks between the LRA and the Government of Uganda with keen interest for over a year. I see many reasons for us to remain optimistic. There are some challenges.
EDITOR—I have been following the progress of the peace talks between the LRA and the Government of Uganda with keen interest for over a year. I see many reasons for us to remain optimistic. There are some challenges.
If some issues are not addressed, the talks might not not be successful. On the part of the LRA, there are serious questions about the commitment of its leader, Joseph Kony. Many people have wondered whether Kony would be willing and avail himself to sign a negotiated agreement reached by the peace team especially given the existing ICC indictment. Kony himself needs to come clear on this. The LRA peace team meanwhile affirms that they have full mandate from their leader.
Secondly, there is worry among the population not just in northern Uganda but also in the rest of the country that the current rift and struggles within the LRA leadership including the death of Otti does not augur well for the peace process.
The LRA needs to show tolerance within its ranks otherwise they will be sending wrong signals to the public especially when (through the peace team) they are sending out messages of peace, asking for forgiveness and claiming to forgive those who have wronged them.
Any further delay to the conclusion of the peace talks will only serve to create more anxiety within the LRA ranks thus providing an even bigger crack in their leadership.
The third serious challenge to the talks is the limited involvement of Khartoum although South Sudan is involved. The Khartoum government is an important factor given their relationship with the LRA in the past. To ignore the Bashir regime in this game might be potentially risky.
The fourth serious challenge is the ICC indictment which seems not to be about to go away until something tangible has been signed between the LRA and the Government of Uganda. Uganada also faces some daunting obstacles. One of this is the current regional initiatives to work with DR Congo and the UN to try and flush out the LRA leadership from their hideout in Garamba forest. This might send wrong signals to the LRA and create doubts as to the government’s commitment to peaceful settlement of the conflict.
The second challenge on the government’s part is the possible temptation to “finish off the LRA now that they are divided and seem to be at their weakestâ€. This temptation should be resisted and I trust Dr Ruhakana Ruganda is able to do this.
Even a small group of rebels can still cause a lot of havoc as we have already witnessed in Uganda! Even after the peace agreement has been signed, the Government still has the challenge to prove that it can be trusted to implement the spirit and the letter of an agreement.
Previous experiences with the 1985 Nairobi peace talks, the 1989 UPDA-Uganda peace accord and the 1993-94 LRA-Uganda negotiations that all failed might just cast doubts in the minds of those trying to negotiate for peace this time round.
There are indications that these peace talks may succeed.
The LRA has shown lots of courage and commitment by accepting to come over to Uganda and get the views of the affected communities, including their victims even from places like Barlonyo where heinous massacres took place. This shows that the LRA are willing to face the truth and reality of the conflict. The rebels have also been proclaiming messages of repentance and asking for forgiveness and reconciliation.
The affected communities have shown a great deal of resilience over the last 21 years and are even ready to start rebuilding their lives. This is the foundation of any future reconstruction initiatives.
The affected communities have also shown willingness to forgive the perpetrators of crimes against them, including those committed by the LRA.
This should be nurtured. The government has proved its commitment by allowing the LRA peace team to come into the country, hold consultations with various stakeholders and do so in a secure environment. This is a good sign that should be encouraged.
Sambey Logira
World Vision
If some issues are not addressed, the talks might not not be successful. On the part of the LRA, there are serious questions about the commitment of its leader, Joseph Kony. Many people have wondered whether Kony would be willing and avail himself to sign a negotiated agreement reached by the peace team especially given the existing ICC indictment. Kony himself needs to come clear on this. The LRA peace team meanwhile affirms that they have full mandate from their leader.
Secondly, there is worry among the population not just in northern Uganda but also in the rest of the country that the current rift and struggles within the LRA leadership including the death of Otti does not augur well for the peace process.
The LRA needs to show tolerance within its ranks otherwise they will be sending wrong signals to the public especially when (through the peace team) they are sending out messages of peace, asking for forgiveness and claiming to forgive those who have wronged them.
Any further delay to the conclusion of the peace talks will only serve to create more anxiety within the LRA ranks thus providing an even bigger crack in their leadership.
The third serious challenge to the talks is the limited involvement of Khartoum although South Sudan is involved. The Khartoum government is an important factor given their relationship with the LRA in the past. To ignore the Bashir regime in this game might be potentially risky.
The fourth serious challenge is the ICC indictment which seems not to be about to go away until something tangible has been signed between the LRA and the Government of Uganda. Uganada also faces some daunting obstacles. One of this is the current regional initiatives to work with DR Congo and the UN to try and flush out the LRA leadership from their hideout in Garamba forest. This might send wrong signals to the LRA and create doubts as to the government’s commitment to peaceful settlement of the conflict.
The second challenge on the government’s part is the possible temptation to “finish off the LRA now that they are divided and seem to be at their weakestâ€. This temptation should be resisted and I trust Dr Ruhakana Ruganda is able to do this.
Even a small group of rebels can still cause a lot of havoc as we have already witnessed in Uganda! Even after the peace agreement has been signed, the Government still has the challenge to prove that it can be trusted to implement the spirit and the letter of an agreement.
Previous experiences with the 1985 Nairobi peace talks, the 1989 UPDA-Uganda peace accord and the 1993-94 LRA-Uganda negotiations that all failed might just cast doubts in the minds of those trying to negotiate for peace this time round.
There are indications that these peace talks may succeed.
The LRA has shown lots of courage and commitment by accepting to come over to Uganda and get the views of the affected communities, including their victims even from places like Barlonyo where heinous massacres took place. This shows that the LRA are willing to face the truth and reality of the conflict. The rebels have also been proclaiming messages of repentance and asking for forgiveness and reconciliation.
The affected communities have shown a great deal of resilience over the last 21 years and are even ready to start rebuilding their lives. This is the foundation of any future reconstruction initiatives.
The affected communities have also shown willingness to forgive the perpetrators of crimes against them, including those committed by the LRA.
This should be nurtured. The government has proved its commitment by allowing the LRA peace team to come into the country, hold consultations with various stakeholders and do so in a secure environment. This is a good sign that should be encouraged.
Sambey Logira
World Vision