Justice and accountability must remain part of the end-game in northern Uganda
Proponents of the government of Uganda and the LRM/A have fingered "Acholi Diaspora" for sabotaging the signing of the final Juba Peace Agreements. While elements of the LRM/A in Diaspora may have had something to do with it, the non-factions of the LRM/A Acholi certainly had no role, despite their misgivings about the Juba process. It would seem it is an effort by both the government, through Walter Ochora, RDC Gulu, and by the LRM/A through James Obita and Nyekorach-Matsanga, their current and former leaders of delegation to the talks, to shift focus away from their own respective shortcomings at Juba, to the victims of their 22 year destructive military futility. It is also an effort to detract from any scrutiny of the insincerity, deception and manipulations they came with to the table and have dealt with each other at Juba and in the past with those who have worked for a just, peaceful, negotiated end to the conflict.
We cannot be as so foolish as to beleive that, when the Ochoras, the Obitas and the Matsangas of this world carelessly incriminate " Acholi Diaspora", every Acholi man, woman and child in the Diaspora must feel guilty-conscious and the cat should eat their tongues. Yes, some fools will think so. But why must we want to be such fools, who would uncritically consume what they are fed, without exercising their own minds and independent thinking? Are we so captive and imobilised by the Museveni and Kony aura and personal presence that we feel whimpering helplessness as those abducted children and inmates of concentration camps? Neither the NRM/A nor the LRM/A and their apologists have any moral planks on which to stand and demonise Acholi Diaspora. For the Ochora, they failed to decisively vanquish the LRM/A for 20 years. For the LRM/A negotiators, if they were not up to snuffle against NRM/A negotiators to extract as favourable concessions as to be acceptable to their leaders in the bush and themselves, it was not the fault of the Acholi Diaspora, but their incompetence. Were this not the case, Kony would have had no reason to listen to LRM/A factions outside of the official delegation at Juba.
Yes, there are some Acholi in the Diaspora; and yes, there are even other non-Acholi Ugandans in the Diaspora, and no doubt, also non-Acholi in Uganda and non-Ugandans in the world, who may have contributed to the failure of the signing of this agreement. There is no doubt that Obita and Matsanga, must know those they are talking about; those are people they must have worked with within the LRM/A organisation, and people with whom they are jostling for influence and power inside the LRM/A organisation. And for Ochora, he is a known Museveni hathcet man, and he is simply earning his bread. In both cases, we should be able to see through their intellectual dishonesty and cowardice in failing to name those they are talking about.
Ochora, Obita and Matsanga crying foul over "Acholi Diaspora" interferance with the talks in Juba attests to the facts that there are opponents of the Juba talks, whether inside or outside Uganda. In this particular case, it signifies that the LRM/A factions in the Diaspora who are not allied with James Obita or Matsanga, are better organised and have more influence on the military leadership of the LRM/A than the Obita and Matsanga factions. Therefore, it is not enough for Ochora or Obita and Matsanga to simply point fingers at the Acholi Diaspora, they need to try to understand the anxieties of that faction and make efforts to mollify it. To simply take the dim view that they are spoilers, fishing in troubled waters, or are not interested in peace, or that it is some amorphous, nameless, irrational, motiveless and beastly Acholi Diaspora leviathan, is ridiculous. These people they are afraid to call by their names are their opponents and competititors within or outside the political forces and organisations they support or fight. They are absolutely not part of the non-LRM/A or non-NRM/A Acholi Diaspora.
Further good news for Obita /Matsanga and Ochora is that, the non-LRM/A and non-NRM/A Acholi are not engaged in the Juba process. However, the bad news is that, were they and when they do, and the time is coming on the heels of Juba, it will be on fundamental issues of institutional reforms and what acceptable social, economic and political frameworks Acholi will re-integrate into the mainstream of Ugandan socio-political life and processes.
When Ochora talks about "Acholi Diaspora", he must certainly be talking about the dispersed political wing of the LRM/A. It is these same elements that have become thorns in the flesh of the likes of Obita, Matsanga, Ojul et al; either because their views carry more weight or their association with the military brass and ultimate authority of the LRM/A is more authentic. That may partly explain why Kony would listen to them. As for Ochora, who is seen as de facto NRM leader in Acholi, it serves his patronage political and career interests, to tar every Acholi outside Acholi with the LRM/A and peace-spoilers brush. Which Acholi would want to be associated with the source of the miseries inflicted on the people of Acholi by the LRM/A and ironically, Ochora's beloved NRM/A? Ochora knows he is pitting himself against perhaps the more enlightened handlers of the LRM/A, who are capable of distinguishing between what is just, acceptable, and justifiable; against what is unfair, wrong, and untenable in dealing with people.
However unjust and convoluted outcomes imposed by the false premises of the Juba process might be, Acholi people and Acholi Diaspora outside of LRM/A ideologues, were cautiously optimistic and willing to work with it. But when proponents of the NRM/A and LRM/A begin to blame the victims of their misadventures, dishonesty and duplicities in dealing with each other since 1985 or 1994, Acholi Diaspora should not be lost for words in how to respond to such infamy. Both the NRM/A and the LRM/A are not the best spokespersons against intrigues, double-crossing, back-stabbing and deceptions. Over the last 22 years, they have shown that they have no equals- except themselves-in spurning efforts and commitments to peace in nortehrn Uganda. As far as the non-combatant Acholi are concerned, there is no better justice for them than to see them swing from lamp posts throught out public squares in Acholi and Uganda. Unfortunately, Acholi is a society that does not believe in capital punishment. But they may just be pushed enough to want to exact ultimate justice for transgressions against them.
For Acholi Diaspora, the lessons of history must not impose such steep a learning curve that we must continue to be severely punished by history for not learning its lessons. Bumbling from one historical moment to another, we Acholi, particularly the intelligentsia, have not learnt anything. From 25 January 1971 to 17 February 1977 and aftermath; 11 April 1979; 28 July 1985; 1985 Nairbobi Peace Talks; 26 January 1986; 1988 Pece Agreements, and failed 1994 and 2004 peace overtures, we are none any wiser. There are a lot more Acholi Diaspora and incountry can talk about Juba and the obstacles to peace, than simply the failure to get the final agreement in Juba. For instance, the ICC issue is unresolved, and Kony has said without that, he will neither sign nor disarm or abandon rebellion. What would a final signiture do, if the LRM/A will not disarm or come out of the bush? And would we be satisfied that justice in northern Uganda is discussed and administered within the limited time periods of 2002 to the present, as the ICC framework imposes? I personally do not believe so, and I hope there are many among Acholi of my generation who share the sentiment that 1986 to 2001 must be fully accounted for.
There are those who have shifted the goals for peace away from the justice imperatrives and aspirations of people in the death camps, to a search for a guarantee on the safety and livehood for Kony and the LRM/A fighters. If that were part of the concession for their signiture, well and good for their negotiators. However, what about accountability? On this, there are those who point to the special division of the Uganda high court to try LRM/A perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity; which again contradicts the undertaking to guarantee safety and livelihoods; and the so-called blanket forgiveness from the Acholi populace. In my view, rather than "Kony's safest route out of the bush" being "through Juba", it is rather that a process that serves to put in place mechanisms for credible justice and accountablity, is the best route to a just and durable peace and stability in northern Uganda. And that should be our goal.
On this score, it is disturbing that Acholi Diaspora should be lost for curt retorts to the self-serving and inaccurate claims from people like Obita, Matsanga and Ochora. Even if it were finally signed, Juba is not an end-all for the justice and political questions surrounding the rebellion, the counterinsurgency response of the government, and others that are not captured by the mandatory remit of the Rome Statute and the ICC investigations and indictments in northern Uganda. The NRM/A and the LRM/A proponents at Juba, are therefore deluding themselves, if they believe that the ICC and Juba are the necessary and sufficient end of the search for a just peace in northern Uganda. On the contrary, the Acholi intelligentsia and patriotic Ugandans, must push for justice and accountability through a full and impartial investigations of all the parties for war crimes and crimes against humanity between 1986-2001; the periods that the ICC mandate does not cover. And to underline the seriousness of this, and to take the responsibility for security of persons and property in Acholi in our own hands, a meaningful and durable peace returning to northern Uganda cannot be acheived short of political autonomy for the region; and it is an issue that both the NRM/A and its proponents in Acholi need to be told in no uncertain terms.The choice is theirs; justice is unnegotiable; but we can bargain between autonomy or secession; but it must be one or the other. And the time is now for the relevant social and democratic forces in Acholi to begin defining the paremeters of this debate beyond mere anecdotes and political buffoonery. It must form a logical book-end to the 22 year nightmares in nortehrn Uganda.
We cannot be as so foolish as to beleive that, when the Ochoras, the Obitas and the Matsangas of this world carelessly incriminate " Acholi Diaspora", every Acholi man, woman and child in the Diaspora must feel guilty-conscious and the cat should eat their tongues. Yes, some fools will think so. But why must we want to be such fools, who would uncritically consume what they are fed, without exercising their own minds and independent thinking? Are we so captive and imobilised by the Museveni and Kony aura and personal presence that we feel whimpering helplessness as those abducted children and inmates of concentration camps? Neither the NRM/A nor the LRM/A and their apologists have any moral planks on which to stand and demonise Acholi Diaspora. For the Ochora, they failed to decisively vanquish the LRM/A for 20 years. For the LRM/A negotiators, if they were not up to snuffle against NRM/A negotiators to extract as favourable concessions as to be acceptable to their leaders in the bush and themselves, it was not the fault of the Acholi Diaspora, but their incompetence. Were this not the case, Kony would have had no reason to listen to LRM/A factions outside of the official delegation at Juba.
Yes, there are some Acholi in the Diaspora; and yes, there are even other non-Acholi Ugandans in the Diaspora, and no doubt, also non-Acholi in Uganda and non-Ugandans in the world, who may have contributed to the failure of the signing of this agreement. There is no doubt that Obita and Matsanga, must know those they are talking about; those are people they must have worked with within the LRM/A organisation, and people with whom they are jostling for influence and power inside the LRM/A organisation. And for Ochora, he is a known Museveni hathcet man, and he is simply earning his bread. In both cases, we should be able to see through their intellectual dishonesty and cowardice in failing to name those they are talking about.
Ochora, Obita and Matsanga crying foul over "Acholi Diaspora" interferance with the talks in Juba attests to the facts that there are opponents of the Juba talks, whether inside or outside Uganda. In this particular case, it signifies that the LRM/A factions in the Diaspora who are not allied with James Obita or Matsanga, are better organised and have more influence on the military leadership of the LRM/A than the Obita and Matsanga factions. Therefore, it is not enough for Ochora or Obita and Matsanga to simply point fingers at the Acholi Diaspora, they need to try to understand the anxieties of that faction and make efforts to mollify it. To simply take the dim view that they are spoilers, fishing in troubled waters, or are not interested in peace, or that it is some amorphous, nameless, irrational, motiveless and beastly Acholi Diaspora leviathan, is ridiculous. These people they are afraid to call by their names are their opponents and competititors within or outside the political forces and organisations they support or fight. They are absolutely not part of the non-LRM/A or non-NRM/A Acholi Diaspora.
Further good news for Obita /Matsanga and Ochora is that, the non-LRM/A and non-NRM/A Acholi are not engaged in the Juba process. However, the bad news is that, were they and when they do, and the time is coming on the heels of Juba, it will be on fundamental issues of institutional reforms and what acceptable social, economic and political frameworks Acholi will re-integrate into the mainstream of Ugandan socio-political life and processes.
When Ochora talks about "Acholi Diaspora", he must certainly be talking about the dispersed political wing of the LRM/A. It is these same elements that have become thorns in the flesh of the likes of Obita, Matsanga, Ojul et al; either because their views carry more weight or their association with the military brass and ultimate authority of the LRM/A is more authentic. That may partly explain why Kony would listen to them. As for Ochora, who is seen as de facto NRM leader in Acholi, it serves his patronage political and career interests, to tar every Acholi outside Acholi with the LRM/A and peace-spoilers brush. Which Acholi would want to be associated with the source of the miseries inflicted on the people of Acholi by the LRM/A and ironically, Ochora's beloved NRM/A? Ochora knows he is pitting himself against perhaps the more enlightened handlers of the LRM/A, who are capable of distinguishing between what is just, acceptable, and justifiable; against what is unfair, wrong, and untenable in dealing with people.
However unjust and convoluted outcomes imposed by the false premises of the Juba process might be, Acholi people and Acholi Diaspora outside of LRM/A ideologues, were cautiously optimistic and willing to work with it. But when proponents of the NRM/A and LRM/A begin to blame the victims of their misadventures, dishonesty and duplicities in dealing with each other since 1985 or 1994, Acholi Diaspora should not be lost for words in how to respond to such infamy. Both the NRM/A and the LRM/A are not the best spokespersons against intrigues, double-crossing, back-stabbing and deceptions. Over the last 22 years, they have shown that they have no equals- except themselves-in spurning efforts and commitments to peace in nortehrn Uganda. As far as the non-combatant Acholi are concerned, there is no better justice for them than to see them swing from lamp posts throught out public squares in Acholi and Uganda. Unfortunately, Acholi is a society that does not believe in capital punishment. But they may just be pushed enough to want to exact ultimate justice for transgressions against them.
For Acholi Diaspora, the lessons of history must not impose such steep a learning curve that we must continue to be severely punished by history for not learning its lessons. Bumbling from one historical moment to another, we Acholi, particularly the intelligentsia, have not learnt anything. From 25 January 1971 to 17 February 1977 and aftermath; 11 April 1979; 28 July 1985; 1985 Nairbobi Peace Talks; 26 January 1986; 1988 Pece Agreements, and failed 1994 and 2004 peace overtures, we are none any wiser. There are a lot more Acholi Diaspora and incountry can talk about Juba and the obstacles to peace, than simply the failure to get the final agreement in Juba. For instance, the ICC issue is unresolved, and Kony has said without that, he will neither sign nor disarm or abandon rebellion. What would a final signiture do, if the LRM/A will not disarm or come out of the bush? And would we be satisfied that justice in northern Uganda is discussed and administered within the limited time periods of 2002 to the present, as the ICC framework imposes? I personally do not believe so, and I hope there are many among Acholi of my generation who share the sentiment that 1986 to 2001 must be fully accounted for.
There are those who have shifted the goals for peace away from the justice imperatrives and aspirations of people in the death camps, to a search for a guarantee on the safety and livehood for Kony and the LRM/A fighters. If that were part of the concession for their signiture, well and good for their negotiators. However, what about accountability? On this, there are those who point to the special division of the Uganda high court to try LRM/A perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity; which again contradicts the undertaking to guarantee safety and livelihoods; and the so-called blanket forgiveness from the Acholi populace. In my view, rather than "Kony's safest route out of the bush" being "through Juba", it is rather that a process that serves to put in place mechanisms for credible justice and accountablity, is the best route to a just and durable peace and stability in northern Uganda. And that should be our goal.
On this score, it is disturbing that Acholi Diaspora should be lost for curt retorts to the self-serving and inaccurate claims from people like Obita, Matsanga and Ochora. Even if it were finally signed, Juba is not an end-all for the justice and political questions surrounding the rebellion, the counterinsurgency response of the government, and others that are not captured by the mandatory remit of the Rome Statute and the ICC investigations and indictments in northern Uganda. The NRM/A and the LRM/A proponents at Juba, are therefore deluding themselves, if they believe that the ICC and Juba are the necessary and sufficient end of the search for a just peace in northern Uganda. On the contrary, the Acholi intelligentsia and patriotic Ugandans, must push for justice and accountability through a full and impartial investigations of all the parties for war crimes and crimes against humanity between 1986-2001; the periods that the ICC mandate does not cover. And to underline the seriousness of this, and to take the responsibility for security of persons and property in Acholi in our own hands, a meaningful and durable peace returning to northern Uganda cannot be acheived short of political autonomy for the region; and it is an issue that both the NRM/A and its proponents in Acholi need to be told in no uncertain terms.The choice is theirs; justice is unnegotiable; but we can bargain between autonomy or secession; but it must be one or the other. And the time is now for the relevant social and democratic forces in Acholi to begin defining the paremeters of this debate beyond mere anecdotes and political buffoonery. It must form a logical book-end to the 22 year nightmares in nortehrn Uganda.
Comments