You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Committee Publications > All Select Committee Publications > Commons Select Committees > International Development > International Development

Memorandum submitted by Saferworld

 

Prospects for sustainable peace in Uganda

 

A. Summary

1. Saferworld works with a range of civil society, government and international partners to respond to security and development challenges arising from conflict and armed violence in the Horn of Africa region. This briefing is informed by our ongoing work to address the proliferation of small arms and promote conflict-sensitive development assistance in Uganda.

 

2. Conflict, insecurity and high levels of armed violence, fuelled by decades of political, social and economic marginalisation, have had a devastating impact on communities across northern Uganda. The ongoing peace talks in Juba between the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) and the Government of Uganda (GoU) represent a window of opportunity to return peace to a region scarred by twenty years of brutal conflict. However, the Juba talks represent only one component of what should be a wider peace-building framework. The long-term sustainability of any future peace agreement will largely depend upon whether the GoU and the international community can create the conditions that support and protect peace and reconciliation efforts already being undertaken by local communities. This requires efforts to be made in addressing the structural causes of conflict in the North and elsewhere in the country.

 

3. This briefing identifies key priorities for the international community in relation to security provision, Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) and small arms control to support peace, recovery and development in the North (1). In addition, this briefing paper outlines challenges for securing peace and recovery of the North in relation to ongoing insecurity in the Karamoja region and the marginalisation and under-development of communities across the districts of northern Uganda. The briefing concludes by offering some concrete guidelines for the international community to ensure that all future aid - development, humanitarian and transition programmes - is delivered in a way that both responds to and has a positive impact upon conflict.

 

B. Key Questions

 

· How is the UK Government working to promote restructuring of security provision and strengthening of non-military approaches to security in Northern Uganda?

 

· How is the international community seeking to encourage the GoU to continue the process of down-sizing the military and undertake overall reform of the security sector in line with GoU policy on Defence Transformation?

 

· What plans does the UK Government have to support the implementation of a comprehensive programme of Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) in the North?

 

· What representations has the UK Government been made to the GoU on insecurity in the Karamoja region to ensure it does not undermine the Juba peace process?

 

· What is the UK Government doing to promote the implementation of the GoU's draft National Plan for Recovery and Development of Northern Uganda (PRDP)?

 

· Is the UK government confident that the PRDP will contribute to peacebuilding in the North and will not inadvertently exacerbate future conflict?

 

· How is the Government seeking to ensure that the potential gains made through the PRDP process feed into longer-term development strategies in Uganda, such as Uganda Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP)?

 

· What mechanisms are in place to ensure that the UK's programmes in Uganda address the linkages between conflict, armed violence and development?

 

· Are the UK Government's decisions about budget support to Uganda informed by an analysis of its impact on conflict in the country?

 

C. Towards a comprehensive and inclusive peace

 

4. Over the past two decades, the conflict between the LRA and the GoU has had devastating consequences for the Acholi population and, in recent times, has affected communities living in neighbouring districts and across the border in South Sudan. A future peace agreement between the two primary actors in the conflict must address the root causes of the conflict in a comprehensive manner, as well as responding to the immediate impact of conflict and the challenges of post-conflict recovery. In addition, efforts must be made to secure an inclusive peace that responds to the grievances of those communities who have been affected by the violence primarily in Acholi but also in neighbouring districts in Uganda and South Sudan.

 

5. There is currently no fixed date for the Juba peace process to produce a peace agreement and no guarantees that the final agreement will form the basis for a lasting resolution of the conflict between the LRA and the GoU. The international community should extend its full support to securing a sustainable and inclusive peace by supporting all parties to reach an agreement that addresses the root causes of the conflict.

 

 

Creating an Environment for Peace in Northern Uganda

 

Security provision

 

6. In the interim period, the international community, including the UK Government, can take a number of steps to build the foundations for a future peace agreement to take hold. The international community should ensure through dialogue and development assistance that the GoU can effectively deliver upon its responsibility to provide security to all its citizens. Without a foundation of security other efforts to secure peace and development risk being undermined. Key issues that the international community should therefore seek to address in this regard include: the strengthening of civilian security provision by the police and reduced military intervention; and an effective DDR process that is consciously linked to efforts to address civilian gun possession and longer-term small arms control. The international community should also ensure that insecurity in neighbouring regions threatening a successful transition to peace, mostly significantly the Karamoja region, is addressed as part of the post-conflict recovery process and that these initiatives are placed within a national development strategy.

 

7. The international community should support the GoU to uphold its commitment to make the transition from military to civilian security provision and should channel assistance to the restructuring of the Uganda Police Force (UPF). It is imperative that the GoU and the international community address the immediate insecurity challenges for communities in the north. However, immediate responses must not undermine long-term processes of security sector reform. For example, the recruitment of former militia to the police force, while strengthening the state's ability to provide security in the short term, must be carefully monitored to ensure that it doesn't become a cause of future insecurity and conflict. A related issue, in this regard, is the sustainability of longer-term funding through the GoU budget, rather than bilateral assistance, for increased numbers of security personnel and for their effective training.

 

8. Closely linked to the establishment of more effective, civilian-led security provision by the Uganda Police Force is the issue of Defence Transformation, and a decreased role for the military. The objectives outlined in the GoU's White Paper on Defence Transformation 2004, setting out the steps towards transformation of the Defence Sector, were welcome commitments. There are concerns however that progress on the implementation of these objectives has not been forthcoming. The ongoing peace talks present a good opportunity for the international community to push the GoU to begin to implement its own plans on national defence transformation.

 

9. The international community should urge the GoU to continue the Defence Review process and fully implement the recommendations outlined in the White Paper on Defence Transformation, offering appropriate assistance where necessary. In addition, the GoU should be encouraged to disclose expenditure in the Classified Budget to respond to concerns that budget support is being channelled into military expenditure.

 

Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration and the control of small arms and light weapons

 

10. The presence of arms within communities in the North and in neighbouring regions also presents a significant challenge to securing peace and development, as the presence of small arms can feed feelings of fear, insecurity and mi-trust and speed the resort to violence. Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) programmes for ex-combatants are therefore a key component of the terms of a future peace agreement and the process through which to support the transition from conflict to peace.

 

11. In a post-conflict context it is crucial, however, to address weapons possession not just by ex-combatants but also by civilians and other groups that fall outside of the formal DDR process. To support the DDR process and to contribute to overall peace and security, the international community must ensure that due consideration is given to longer-term small arms control, including the wider issue of uncontrolled civilian ownership of small arms, in the North and in neighbouring regions. DDR programmes should be designed with a clear vision of how they will link to other immediate and longer term arms control initiatives.

 

12. Recognition must also be made that arms possession and misuse are a symptom of deeper root causes of conflict and insecurity. As such, measures to address these root causes should accompany technical disarmament and arms management responses. The international community should, therefore, promote a DDR process that consciously links with efforts to improve security by the Uganda Police Force and with broader long-term small arms initiatives, such as Uganda National Action Plan for Arms Management and Disarmament.

 

Conflict in Karamoja

 

13. The international community should support efforts to bring peace, security and development to districts across the north of Uganda, including in West Nile and Karamoja. The current situation in Karamoja, fuelled by many of the same root causes as the conflict in Acholi, threatens to spill over into other districts, derailing prospects for peace and recovery of the North. Insecurity in the Karamoja region, fuelled by a lack of access to natural resources and exacerbated by the easy availability of illegal SALW, has led to the death of hundreds of people and has generated a large numbers of internally displaced people (IDP) in north-eastern Uganda. The GoU's attempts to forcibly disarm these communities, the use of excessive force by some members of the UPDF and lack of effective measures to guarantee security of pastoralist communities, in the absence of civilian security structures, has increased tensions between local communities and the GoU.

 

14. The international community should support the GoU to address the underlying causes of the conflict in the Karamoja, as part of its efforts to promote and secure peace in the North. In this regard it will be crucial to adopt voluntary, rather than forcible, approaches to disarmament, as well as to address the development needs and grievances of the Karamojong community.

 

15. Efforts to address security challenges through DDR, small arms controls and reform of the security sector need to be linked to the broader development agenda. A key part of such an approach should include supporting the National Plan for the Development and Recovery of Northern Uganda (PRDP) that covers not only the North (Acholi), but also West Nile and Karamoja regions. Moreover, ensuring that the security and development efforts that are focused on the North quickly become part of a national, all-of-Uganda process will be equally important for the longer-term peace and prosperity of Uganda.

 

D. Delivering peace and development - making aid conflict-sensitive

 

16. The international community can contribute to peace, recovery and development in the northern Acholi, West Nile and Karamoja regions by basing all future assistance - humanitarian, development and transition programmes - upon solid analysis of the structural causes of conflict and by acknowledging parallels between the LRA conflict and conflicts in other parts of Uganda.

 

17. The PRDP (see paragraph 15 above) is an important first step to address both the consequences of conflict in the North and the broader, long-term development challenges that still lie ahead for the region. As such, the PRDP provides an opportunity for catalysing support to the North and its effective implementation should be supported. The modalities for this are yet to be decided, and it appears that the Juba peace talks include discussion on the extent of involvement of the LRA in managing this. It is crucial that the PRDP implementation is much more than a bargaining chip in the peace talks - the GoU continues to have the primary responsibility for ensuring the recovery and development of the North, and should therefore maintain ownership in the effective implementation of the PRDP. The international community can play an important role in ensuring that this happens.

 

18. For long-term peace and stability in the North, however, it is important to remember that the PRDP is currently envisaged as a three-year intervention. It is therefore crucial that the momentum created by the PRDP is carried forward into existing development frameworks such as the Uganda Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) and the donor assistance strategy supporting this, the Uganda Joint Assistance Strategy (UJAS). Equally, specific aspects of the PRDP will have to be taken forward in specific sectoral strategies, all of which benefit from active donor involvement. There is therefore an opportunity for the international community - in particular the UK Government - to ensure that gains made through the PRDP process feed into longer-term development in Uganda through the more 'permanent' strategies and frameworks.

 

19. As a country that has suffered from many conflicts in the past, the North is not the only part of Uganda that has the potential for renewed future conflict. As one civil society leader put it: "The conflict in the North can just as easily happen elsewhere in the country." All future development assistance to Uganda (in the North and elsewhere) therefore needs to be based on a thorough understanding of the existing structural causes of conflict, relating to issues such as marginalisation and perceived (or real) favouritism in the political system, and the remnants of past conflicts that have never undergone comprehensive reconciliation processes.

 

20. Assistance to the North should also be done in parallel with programmes addressing the needs of other communities in Uganda (particularly those still recovering from past conflicts), in order to avoid further tension between the North and other communities. The UK Government, drawing on its own experience of conducting conflict analysis, can play a lead role in ensuring that the international community in Uganda base their support on joint analysis of these issues. Macro frameworks such as the PEAP and the UJAS, as well as sector-wide strategies (e.g. water, health, education), can then be designed and implemented in a conflict-sensitive way, contributing to addressing the root causes of conflict and preventing future conflict. A recent Saferworld report suggests a set of recommendations to the Government, donors and civil society of ways they can support and help implement the PEAP (2).

 

 

(1) Throughout this briefing we have used a limited definition of the North to refer to the Acholi region - the area most directly affected by the LRA conflict. Other northern areas, such as West Nile and Karamoja, are referred to by name.

 

(2) Aid and Conflict in Uganda, Saferworld March 2007