![]() |
|
PROPOSED FOOD FOR PEACE: Lt. Gen. Salim Saleh |
Dear General Salim Saleh;
You do deserve a “good” grade for continuing the effort to find solution to the bloody conflict in northern Uganda. At a time when most people have simply walked away or turned their attention to more interesting issues, you have continued to plough forward to resolving the conflict has consumed the north for the better part of a decade and half.
That said your proposal to end the war in northern Uganda through a unique food-for-peace program is a non-starter. Looked at closely, the idea is so full of holes it is akin to suggesting that the raffia basket be used for fetching water from the well.
Even assuming that government can guarantee security for the project to prosper (something it has failed or been unable to do), there are many unanswered questions. For instance, how would the growing of food by displaced persons garner peace for the region? In the mean time, what happens to the LRA and Joseph Kony; will they too beat their swords into ploughshare?
The problem with the food-for-peace program is that it makes very broad assumptions based on false premises. For example, it assumes that poverty alleviation will bring peace — let people become richer and peace will follow as surely as the sun rises from the east.
However, the reality is that people are poor because of the continuing insecurity, and that given peace, will prosper very quickly. In fact, if the conflict could be resolved this morning, the camps would be emptied by noon today as displaced citizens flock back home. Many have witnessed disproportionate suffering in the camps, and no promise of economic prosperity could make them stay for even one night longer in those god-forsaken camps.
Moreover, the food-for-peace program also assumes that this conflict will fester for another five to ten years, roughly the time it takes for any food program to bear fruits (no pun intended). As such, the idea is defeatist, namely by accepting that no solution exists outside of a military
one. One could almost hear the army commanders say to each other:
Since we are incapable of finishing the LRA with bullets, let’s finish them off by growing cabbages and onions. In other words, there is too much emphasis placed on “finishing off” the LRA one way or the other, and not enough invested in actually talking to them. Interestingly, people were shoved into the so-called protected villages precisely because the government wanted to “finish” off the LRA.
Yes, we know that the LRA is evil and, under different circumstances, should face the full weight of the law for atrocities committed against innocent civilians.
However, if you are really keen to rescue the people of northern Uganda from the quagmire, and one does not doubt your sincerity, the first move is to get the government to silence its guns. This was the step that the British government took to broker a permanent ceasefire with the Irish Republican Army after three decades of bloody fighting.
Similarly, in spite of deadly attacks by radical Palestinian groups, the Al Aqsa Brigade, Jihad, Fatah and Hamas, the Israeli government is beginning to extend the olive branch. In both cases, the British and Israeli accepted the fact that it was irresponsible to continue fighting the enemy with guns and bullets while civilian casualties mounted. When will the Uganda government come to similar awakening?
Secondly, as someone who is stationed on the ground, you are aware that Acholi elders, religious leaders and ordinary citizens are keen to invite a third party, say the United Nations, to broker a peace talk. The reason being that the current peace effort is DOA simply because it does not inspire confidence in the LRA ranks to give up armed struggle.
Yes, government forces continue to claim victory in the battlefield, but what good is your victory when the belly of the child under your protection is slit wide open? Moreover, is the government any cleaner than the LRA when it stubbornly refuses to acknowledge t
hat this conflict has gone on far enough and cannot be resolved by force?
How long should the citizens of northern Uganda have to wait while government puts more money into training and arming the army to effectively neutralise the LRA? What, in the opinion of government leaders, is the acceptable number of civilian dead and casualties before it can look for alternatives?
Finally, you can move things faster by suggesting to government to return to the 1994 style of peacemaking. Given a genuine hand in 1994 by Betty Bigombe (who travelled many times alone to meet the LRA in the bush without a security escort), the LRA was ready to disengage and return home.
Think for a moment, if you were on the other side listening to current government pronouncements, would you willingly stick your neck out of the bush to see whether you are greeted with an olive branch or the barrel of an AK-47?
Probably not, and yet to resolve the situation the government needs to convince the LRA to stick its neck out as happened in 1994. Then, when peace comes, you can really begin to talk about growing cabbages and onions.
Writer can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Published on: Thursday, 3rd July, 2003 |
