Uganda’s hidden war

“They tied me and laid me down. They told me not to cry. Not to make any noise. Then one man…picked up an axe. First he chopped [off] my left hand, then my right. Then he chopped my nose, my ears and my mouth with a knife”.

Uganda, a nation of 26 million people in East Africa, is a land of contrasts. On the one hand there are atrocities like this one, typical of a regional conflict that has been going on for the eighteen or so years since the end of full-scale civil war. On the other hand the “pearl of Africa”, with its successful programmes against HIV/Aids, comparatively free media and vibrant civil society, is often seen as a poster-child whose tag-line might be “A Different Africa Is Possible”.

It was on the second account that US president, George W. Bush, chose Uganda as a stage for his tour of Africa in the summer of 2003.

Not everyone in Uganda is smiling

Bush made a special point of teaming up with best buddy and lifelong Marxist ideologue, President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, to promote trade and cooperation. The relationship continues to bear fruit. On 3 February this year, for example, the US named Uganda among 63 countries eligible to share “billions of dollars” in US aid under a “new programme aimed at rewarding developing nations which commit to democratic and free market reform”.

But it’s not just the Americans who are heavily invested in Uganda. Britain, the former colonial power, is one of Uganda’s largest donors. Together, western nations – that is, their taxpayers – supply 52% of the Ugandan government budget.

So when, in November 2003, Jan Egeland, the United Nations under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, described the situation in [northern] Uganda as “one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises”, you’d have thought there might be some attention, especially as the crisis was supposed to have been resolved by decisive Ugandan government military action terminating in December 2002.

Understanding why this is not the case requires a little of that most precious resource: attention. It helps to know something about the origins of the crisis in the north, where the remnants of the former regime were never entirely defeated. It helps to know that while rebel leader Joseph Kony is a world-class monster, the Ugandan Army are no angels either.

All this, and more, is helpful when confronting ongoing horror and new atrocities that happen even as this piece is being written, and when analysing what may really be going on when Museveni refers the situation to the International Criminal Court.

Chris Dolan, a researcher on issues of war and displacement at the London School of Economics, identifies four major concerns:

• the war in the north (which now also includes significant parts of the east), is eroding Uganda’s successes in poverty reduction

• the war in the north is probably also the weakest link in Uganda’s attempts to combat HIV/Aids (“Militarisation is, to my mind, undoubtedly the major vector of HIV in the north, which now suffers some of the highest HIV rates in the country. The links between ever-increasing militarisation, high levels of abuse by both parties, and severe impoverishment of the civilian population, are clear. In many cases the supposed protectors are themselves the abusers, such that I strongly believe that HIV should be dealt with primarily as a governance issue rather than a medical or social one”).

• the war in the north is squeezing Uganda’s already limited political/democratic space, most visibly in the public media.

• the last six months have seen the formation and arming of ethnic militias, a dynamic which is deeply disturbing on many levels.

Dolan’s analysis, outlined at a conference at London’s Royal Institute for International Affairs on 3 February, is helpful to the work of a peace delegation led by the Anglican Archbishop John Odama, which visited New York, Washington, Ottawa, London and Brussels from 25 January-7 February (read their recommendations here).

In Britain, organisations such as the Campaign for Political and Human Rights in Uganda have helped to bring the issue to the attention of members of parliament, several of whom have signed an ‘early day motion’ (EDM, a parliamentary device to draw attention to an important issue) calling for urgent action.

Such a move could help influence the climate in which Uganda’s wealthy partners make decisions, especially if more people in these countries write to their legislators. In Britain, subjects can ask their MP to support EDM 432. In the US, Canada, the European Parliament and elsewhere there may be equivalent proposals; if there are none, citizens can ask their legislators to initiate them.

Writing in the 28 January edition of New Vision (Kampala), Opiyo Oloya puts it this way:

“That this year will go forth without as much as a nod from developed nations would be yet another clear indication that to get attention you must either be flushed with precious resources like oil or be extremely lucky or both.

Rwanda was not so lucky in 1994, and so it went down as the modern day story of genocide. When the west woke up from its self-imposed stupor, all that was left were the skulls and bones of little babies and innocent women and men.”