Uganda: The state and the nation

This year’s International Association for the Study of Forced Migration (IASFM) conference focused on the link between governance and forced migration. During the conference’s numerous paper presentations and discussions this relationship emerged most clearly as the severed link between state and citizen, resulting in forced migration – where a citizen becomes a refugee, or an internally displaced person. Especially in African countries, as argued by the presenters, violent conflict often stems from unresolved national questions, a result of the fact that state-building had preceded nation-building. One of the main causes of massive displacement is the contested nation-state and unaddressed questions of national integration. In a continent were most of the borders were randomly imposed by colonialists and states are in principle invented entities, questions of identity and belonging have their bearing on stability, security and governance. This article will explore what some of the implications of this understanding are for Uganda, a country that is up to today struggling with what it means to be a Ugandan and how the state Uganda could one day become a nation. The question is, is it possible to overcome the ethnic and regional divides that have fuelled conflict in Uganda and build a shared national identity? In other words, how could Uganda one day be kept together by its people, rather than its army?

Over the last quarter of a century, Uganda saw an increase in security and consolidation of state power, at least in the south of the country. Nonetheless, the bitterness of past pain and trauma in Uganda continues to haunt the country and continues to influence the way people look at each other and the state. When a new regime came to power in 1986, it faced a legacy of a total disintegration and deep wounds left by political violence. Faced with an uphill task of safeguarding stability and security, the new regime shunned the difficult questions of national truth, reconciliation and integration. (A truth commission was established, but it was marked by silence rather than a national discussion. Its findings were never published.) By doing so, it became virtually impossible to overcome deep-rooted divisions in the country. As such, the regime may have succeeded in pacifying most of the rebellions against it, without appeasing the grievances. As Brian Kagoro stated during one of the plenary panels, ‘Africa has to deal with its past.’

The legacy of the country’s north–south division and militarisation of state power was left unaddressed and allowed to fester. This was felt most strongly by the people in the north of the country. As Norbert Mao claimed during the launch of the documentary ‘The Governance Gap’: ‘When the NRA/M [National Resistance Army/Movement"> reached the Nile, they left the M and crossed with the A’. He held that the impact of the 20-year war between the LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army) and the NRA/M that followed can be seen to today. ‘The society has been militarised. The war has had an impact.’ This was also argued by Ryan Butyniec, who presented the paper ‘After the smoke clears: Understanding the dynamics of ethnic identity in protracted conflict and displacement effected Acholiland, northern Uganda’. Butyniec demonstrates how socially constructed ethnicity is often at the root of violent conflict. He also sets out to demonstrate how, in turn, protracted conflict and displacement have had an impact on socially constructed ethnicity by the Acholi. An important element of that was to become a sense of shared disempowerment and distrust of the state. As Mao said ‘[After the NRA had crossed the Nile"> they created a Ministry of Pacification, for subjugation of the North.’ Butyniec gives a voice to the victims of the northern conflict and how it related to their relationship with the central government. He quotes a respondent from the region as saying, ‘the south [is"> wanting to keep the Acholi poor and weak’. Whether the grievances are real or perceived, it is clear that they have had their impact on how the Acholi perceive themselves and how they perceive the state and their relationship to it.

The relationship between people and the state was further undermined by the massive displacement that people in the north faced. As argued by several presenters during the conference (amongst others Adam Branch, Marjoke Oosterom and Norbert Mao), Ugandans in the north were transformed from citizens with rights and duties to powerless beneficiaries of aid and protection. Even the intervention of the ICC (International Criminal Court) exacerbated this feeling of diminished agency. Butyniec: ‘[T]he ICC dehumanised the resistance and created a local reliance for international assistance in regards to conflict mitigation. For most this is insulting, as many in Acholi already feel reliant for services provided to them by international NGOs.’ On the whole, people in the north were disempowered and linkages to central power were further severed and trust was further undermined.

A panel discussion under the title ‘Citizenship under threat: The challenge of belonging in the Great Lakes Region’ attributed the prevalence of conflict in the Great Lakes Region to a crisis in citizenship. It was argued that state structures were built on ethnicity rather than citizenship and a common national identity and sense of belonging and solidarity. Uganda seems to face this predicament.

With the strength of the current state of Uganda, the time has come to strengthen the nation of Uganda. Without addressing the above issues, divisions and differences between people will deepen and contribute to the recipe for further conflict. Only when the institution of citizenship for nationals of Uganda is made stronger can ethnic diversity be celebrated rather than be a cause of conflict. With a highly fragmented view on what it means to be Ugandan, the time has come for Ugandans to come together to deal with the past, discuss what went wrong, and overcome past divisions, on regional and national levels. As Butyniec argues in his paper: ‘the time for reconciling local truths and narratives appears pertinent.’ At this moment, now stability and security is said to have been established and gained root, a national truth and reconciliation process offers the best chances for a reconciled, unified and peaceful Uganda.

BROUGHT TO YOU BY PAMBAZUKA NEWS

* Annelieke van de Wiel is a transitional justice lawyer with the Refugee Law Project, Faculty of Law, Makerere University.
* This article forms part of the 'IASFM13: Governing migration' special issue, produced in collaboration with the International Association for the Study of Forced Migration (IASFM) and the Refugee Law Project, Faculty of Law, Makerere University, Kampala.
* Please send comments to editor[at]pambazuka[dot]org or comment online at Pambazuka News.