Juba Talks: The confidence-building measures that wrecked LRA Confidence

By John A. Akec*

Aug 7, 2006 — As many head teachers and parents would tell you, not
every school trip or mountain climbing exercise goes
well. Some trips, despite good intention and
preparations end up in tears. Such was the sorrowful
fate of a confidence-building measure expedition
organised by the governments of Uganda and Southern
Sudan (the current peace mediator) in which 15
relatives of LRA commanders, Acholi elders, Church
leaders, peace activists, and journalists were
transported to meet Joseph Kony near the border of
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Southern Sudan.
According to news reports: on Wednesday 3 August 06,
Joseph Kony met with Acholi leaders, many of whom
spent the night in Kony’s base. On Thursday Joseph
Kony and Vincent Otti met Dr. Riek Machar, the chief
mediator, as well as personalities representing the
government of Uganda. On Thursday night and Friday
morning, the relationships between Riek Machar and LRA
soured, to everyone’s amazement.

WHAT WENT WRONG?

According to media sources, on Wednesday (2 Aug.
2006), the LRA promised in principle that Vincent Otti
would accompany Riek Machar and LRA delegation to Juba
for the second round of peace talks. On Thursday (3
Aug. 2006), the LRA changed its mind and informed Dr.
Machar that it did not feel safe enough for Otti to
join the talk at this early stage when there is no
ceasefire, and the ICC arrest warrant is still in
place, thus rejecting the government of Uganda’s (GOU)
key demandFurthermore, the LRA turned down the request
by Riek Machar to reveal the locations of their bases
in Southern Sudan and Democratic Republic of Congo. It
was at that point that Riek Machar stormed out of the
meeting, ordered his convoy to leave the site of the
meeting leaving the LRA negotiating team stranded in
the bush some 27 miles away from Kony’s base in the
DCR. On Friday (4 Aug. 2006) the LRA expressed its
concerns over its rapidly declining confidence in the
mediation role of Dr. Riek Machar and the GOSS and
threatened to look for another venue for the
negotiation if the eroding impartiality of the
mediator did not stop.

The GOU also did not help matters by contradicting Dr.
Machar when it declared that it is ready to resume
talks with or without Otti. It also went into
overdrive to undermine the confidence between the LRA
and GOSS by claiming that the LRA had withdrawn from
the talk. However, to show that it had not withdrawn
from the talk, it declared a unilateral ceasefire.
However, the government thus far has not reciprocated
on the ceasefire, insisting hat i will agree to one
only after a comprehensive peace agreement is singed.

Because of this mistrust, the LRA is said to have
relocated its headquarters for fear of attack by
Ugandan army, especially since its location is now
well known to the GOU following recent confidence
building visits by various government functionaries.
Although the GOU took advantage of this misfortune to
drive a wedge between the LRA and the mediator by
declaring that the LRA has pulled out of the talk, the
LRA quickly snuff it off by declaring a unilateral
ceasefire and invited the government to reciprocate it
was still interested in the peace talk.

DR RIEK MACHAR – A MAN WITH MUCH TO PROVE

The Northern Uganda’s Peace Initiative led by South
Sudan vice president, Dr Riek Machar, has put his name
in the limelight of world’s media. The pictures of his
first meeting with Kony in May 2006 were flashed on TV
screens around the world. The initiative has attracted
a lot of interest internationally. For instance, in a
meeting with president Museveni last week, British
High Commissioner to Uganda, Mr. Francois Gordon, told
the press in Kampala that the international community
is following the talks with “keen interest.” John
Prendergast of International Crisis Group said
recently in a workshop at the Woodrow Wilson Institute
in Washington DC that “the effort of the government of
South Sudan to mediate between the LRA and the GOU is
noble.” Prendergast called for the US administration
to appoint a peace envoy for Northern Uganda and to
act as a guarantor for any agreement that the parties
to conflict might reach in the future.
To appreciate what happened last week, it is worth
looking into Dr Machar’s biography. He led an
unsuccessful coup d’ tat against John Garang in 1991.
The break away group was later renamed South Sudan
Independent Movement (SSIM) which later signed the
1997 Khartoum Peace Agreement. Under Machar’s
leadership, SSIM disintegrated. Khartoum Agreement
that Dr Machar championed was a spectacular failure
and enabled the Khartoum government to secure oil
fields in the Upper Nile region. Ever since, military
balance has swung in favour of the Khartoum
government. Finally, in 2000, Dr Machar fled to Kenya
with a handful of followers, leaving the bulk of his
army under the control of the Khartoum government.
Machar rejoined SPLM/A under John Garang in 2001. To
his credit, Dr. Machar played a dynamic role in
healing a rift between Chairman John Garang and his
then Deputy, Salva Kiir in Rumbek in November 2004.
Otherwise, his rejoining did not mean much in terms of
military gains for SPLA but it was a moral, symbolic
and political victory for SPLM and South Sudanese as a
whole since he was the original leader of the
rebellion.

Some unforgiving commentators do draw a parallel
between Machar’s return to SPLM in 2001 and the
biblical “prodigal son” who left the family rich and
powerful, returned broke and weak. They also point out
that as Chairman of SSIM, Dr Machar was largely
responsible for the disintegration of his political
group. He is said to be unpredictable and
controversial at times. The ghost of his track
records, showing him to be a quitter and lacking in
foresight, may continue to undermine his credibility.

To rectify the situation, Furthermore, the President
of GOSS has not taken full charge of the negotiation
although Dr. Machar is still the actual mediator,
again showing the erosion of confidence in Dr. Machar.
Instead of proceeding to discuss substantive issues,
Dr. Machar will now have to spend some of the effort
on rebuilding confidence. Time will tell if Dr. Machar
can overcome the curse and the shadow of his past
failures and pull off a miracle this time around?

THE LACK OF FOCUS AND PRIORITIES

The greatest weakness of Southern Sudan mediated talks
between LRA and GoU (Government of Uganda) is the lack
of focus and absence of information about any progress
or the lack of it. In order to make some progress, the
Chief mediator should continue to insist on ceasefire
declaration by both parties. Once the parties agree,
they should declare their principles of negotiations.
Then the GOSS should call for support of international
community including that of the UN, South Africa,
Britain, and the US and others. In particular, the
GOSS should use its good office with current US
Administration to convince the Bush administration to
appoint a Peace Envoy for Northern Uganda and to act
as a guarantor of any agreement that may result from
these efforts.

Furthermore, the implications of ICC arrest warrant
should be addressed. Few weeks ago, Mr Koffi Annan,
the UN Secretary General said the “ICC’s arrest
warrant made LRA leaders less approachable.” Ms. Betty
Bigombe told Christian Science Monitor that the ICC’s
arrest warrant of LRA commanders has brought
“complications.” The implication of such statements
was played out this weekend when the trust between the
LRA leaders and Riek Machar fell to rock bottom.

WHAT IS AT STAKE?

Since the war started in August of 1986 in Northern
Uganda, about 2 million in Northern and Eastern Uganda
have been forced out of their homes by the Ugandan
army to live under horrendous conditions in some 200
camps, largely recognized as death traps.

U.N. Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland
described the Northern Uganda conflict as “One of the
worst forgotten conflicts in the world, and worse [in
magnitude] than that of Darfur or Iraq.” Dr Rima
Salah, UNICIEF Deputy Director, told Congressional
Human Rights Caucus on 9th March 2006 that:“The social
issues that exist elsewhere in Uganda’s domestic
violence, rape and child abuse, among others? are
exacerbated in the camps. The mortality and morbidity
rates are described as emergencies spun out of
control.”

Mark Simmonds (MP, Boston and Skegness, UK) in a
briefing to British Parliament in July 2006 quoted a
report by World Vision (Uganda) that 3,500 people die
every month in Uganda’s Internally Displaced-Persons’
camps. This mortality rate is believed to be 3 times
higher than those recorded in Darfur in 2005.

High profile Ugandan personalities such as Dr Olara
Otunnu have described the policy of forceful
relocation of Acholi population to these camps as
“Genocide.” Otunnu, a former UN Undersecretary and
Special Representative for Children and Arm Conflict
painted grim a picture of abject destitution in these
camps in an article published in Foreign Affairs
(Jul/Aug. 2006) entitled “Secret Genocide:”

“4,000 sharing a latrine, women waiting for 12 hours
to fill a jerrycan at well, 10 people packing
themselves sardine-like in a hut.”

As a result, any form of economic activity has been
brought to a grinding halt. A whole culture, people,
and their environment are being systematically
destroyed by Uganda’s government counter-insurgency
policy. Everything Acholi is dying, wrote one
commentator. Hence, what was once a thriving community
and vibrant economy in Northern Uganda has been
reduced to wasteland as human development indicators
went into free fall: 95% of population now lives below
poverty line, 70% of them in absolute poverty, 1000
children die in the region every week of preventable
causes. Contrast that with the situation in the
Southern and Western Uganda: only 37% live below
poverty line.

This situation cannot continue without serious action
being taken to reverse the fortunes of Northern Uganda
for the better. It is also a threat to peace and
stability in Great Lakes region. The government of
Southern Sudan and vice president Riek Machar have
committed themselves to a demanding task. The
government of Southern Sudan is now under intense
scrutiny to show leadership, or loose face and
credibility.

Whether Dr Machar will stay the course and not allow
himself from being manipulated or unduly influenced by
any of the parties to conflict remains to be seen.

* Dr John Akec is a political analyst based in London . He is also the editor of a blog where he posts articles and comments about the Sudan. http://johnakecsouthsudan.blogspot.com/. Akec can be reached at [email protected].