Uganda: Conflict Assessment Report for the Month of July 2014
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UGANDA: CONFLICT ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2014 Issue Date: August 5, 2014 Disclaimer This publication was produced for review by the United State Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Supporting Access to Justice, Fostering Equity & Peace (SAFE) Program. The author’s views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. INTRODUCTION The following is a Monthly Conflict Assessment Report provided by the USAID Supporting Access to Justice, Fostering Equity and Peace (SAFE) Program for July 2014. The SAFE Program conducts monthly conflict assessments to better understand and respond to conflict patterns and trends as they develop throughout Uganda. Information is primarily filtered through SAFE’s trained Conflict Monitors who report on conflict incidents that occur in their communities. SAFE has Conflict Monitors based in West Nile, Acholi, Bunyoro and Karamoja sub regions, Gulu. The information provided by the Conflict Monitors is supplemented with reports issued by the media and civil society organizations (CSOs). The SAFE Program verifies reported incidents for accuracy. For a more detailed description of the monthly conflict assessment methodology, please refer to Appendix A. Seven Categories of conflicts are monitored in the Monthly Conflict Assessment: Land-related conflict Politically-motivated conflict Socio-ethnic conflict Ethnic conflict Conflict motivated by socio-economic issues or poverty Spill over and on-going conflicts that have expanded into new districts/countries Other conflicts that do not fall into the first six categories (see Annex B for the types of conflicts) The conflicts are additionally disaggregated by industry or sector, where relevant (for example, oil and gas, mining, infrastructure, manufacturing, and agriculture). Conflict incidents are additionally categorized by colors, which represent their status at the time of the report. Categories include: Red: Currently experiencing violence Orange: High-risk situations with the potential to degenerate into large scale violence involving at least ten people Yellow: Medium-risk situations where tension is growing gradually Green: Situations with low-risk for large scale violence but also have a negative impact on social cohesion Each of the seven conflict-categories is assessed for the extent to which each meets the criteria of conflict-levels identified in color-codes. Only verified conflict incidents are reported in the Monthly Assessment. For this reason, it is likely that the SAFE Program may not report some conflicts, if information is not readily available for verification purposes. The report analyzes sub-data for the four traditional regions of Uganda: Northern (Acholi, Lango, Karamoja and West Nile sub regions); Eastern (Teso, Busoga, Bugisu, Sebei, and Bukedi sub regions); Western (Ankole, Kigezi, Bunyoro and Tooro sub regions); and Central (Buganda sub region). NATIONAL OVERVIEW This month, most of the conflicts were related to land disputes as reflected on the graph on the next page. They Kaabong Arua accounted for 36% of the total conflicts this month. The types of land disputes Moroto have not changed in recent months, Ntoroko because they continue to range from Bundibugyo land use rivalry, boundary disputes, Kases illegal and/or secret transactions, land e ownership and/or inheritance and Above: Conflict hot spot Districts for the month of July disputes involving local residents and 2014 government institutions or private sector companies. Ethnically based disputes contributed to 27% with the clashes over tribal and cultural identity in Rwenzori sub region in western Uganda causing national panic. Although the police and army have contained the violence, the speed at which this dispute degenerated into systematic violence suggests that, if government and civil society actors do not take necessary steps to promote trust and co-existence among the disputing tribal groups in the country, large scale violence remains possible at the slightest opportunity. If government and other actors do not intervene in time, the same kind of violence will likely erupt in Bukedi sub region, where there is currently tension among the Bagwere ethnic group over who should become the King of their recently created Kingdom. Socio-ethnic conflicts and spill over conflicts from neighbouring countries and districts each accounted for 18% of the total conflicts that SAFE recorded and verified this month. In West Nile sub region where we consistently reported the existence of tension related to the influx of refugees along the border districts, and refugee hosting communities from January to May 2014, tension and the risk of violence has reduced, but minor incidents still occur. There was only one refugee conflict incident reported this month, and it was low level, and had little potential for large scale violence. There is demonstrated effort from local communities and district authorities to resolve such incidents amicably. Overall, SAFE remains concerned about increasing tribal tension in the country, and particularly the splitting of older Kingdoms and/or creation of new ones which carries prospects of renewed tribal and ethnic tensions in areas where these tensions pre-exist. Nonetheless, we will continue to monitor any possible conflict patterns and trends, and where possible intervene directly, or using local partners through our grants. Below: Number of reported conflict incidents, July 2014. Ongoing violence more than 10 people Very high tension, the situation can easily degenerate into violence Tension is building up 4 2 0 Source: USAID SAFE Conflict Monitoring Database, July 2014 REGIONAL OVERVIEW Northern Region In the April 2014 conflict assessment report, we reported that the Turkana pastoralists crossed over with their livestock from Kenya to Kaabong District in Karamoja sub region with illegal firearms, an issue that raised safety and security concerns1 among local residents in Kaabong District.2 Although the primary reason for coming to Kaabong District (which is along the Uganda Kenya border) was to look for water and pasture for their livestock,3 this month tension grew between the Turkana and the local residents because of accusations that they were sexually assaulting and raping women; and in some instances killing innocent civilians, or renting out their guns to criminals.4 In response, the Kaabong District officials in partnership with the District Security Committee ordered all Turkana pastoralists to leave the district and return to Kenya.5 Our Karamoja based Mobile Coordinator and Conflict Monitors verified this information and established further that the Turkana pastoralists are free to return to Kaabong on condition that their local government in Kenya agrees to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Kaabong District in order to regulate their behaviour.6 While the Turkana have started leaving Kaabong District, it is not a permanent solution because, although the Dodoth pastoralists—who are the primary ethnic group in Kaabong were disarmed by the government of Uganda as part of the government’s disarmament exercise in Karamoja—they remain vulnerable to possible attacks7 from the Turkana who have not been disarmed by their governments. The Dodoth and Turkana have a history of raiding each other’s livestock.8 The Karamoja based SAFE Mobile Coordinator and community conflict reporters will continue monitoring the situation to see if there are tensions as the Turkana return home. In a separate incident, nine (9) Karimojong warriors who have been hiding in South Sudan since 2001 because they did not want to surrender their illegal guns9 as part of the disarmament program in Karamoja returned and willingly surrendered five guns to the army in Kaabong District.10 These men were also on the Uganda People Defence Forces’ (UPDF) 1 http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Karimojong-cry-to-government-over-armed-Kenyan-rustlers/- /688334/2160122/-/20yaai/-/index.html 2 Also see SAFE program April 2014 conflict assessment report 3 http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/2-000-Kenyan-pastoralists-enter-Uganda/-/688334/2157840/-/no8b7r/- /index.html 4 Ibid 5 Daily Monitor July 22nd, 2014 6 Ibid 7 http://www.monitor.co.ug/News/National/Karimojong-cry-to-government-over-armed-Kenyan-rustlers/- /688334/2160122/-/20yaai/-/index.html 8 Ibid 9 USAID SAFE Mobile Coordinator 10 New vision July 14th , 2014 most wanted list of notorious cattle rustlers, and although they feared that the government might arrest them upon return, they were warmly received by the Resident District Commissioner (RDC).11 During their formal reception, they mentioned that there were many Karimojong pastoralists who fled at the height of disarmament and are now living in hiding in South Sudan, but would like to return home; however, they are afraid of a possible arrest because of their previous involvement in cattle rustling and decision to flee away from disarmament.12 It is not clear whether any particular previous or current intervention by other peace actors in Karamoja influenced their decision to return, but SAFE is pleased with this trend, and encourages peace building actors to promote peace messaging and other programs that will disseminate the right information to any Ugandan pastoralist living in hiding and would like to return home and surrender their gun to the government. In the West Nile sub region, there was a fight between the Nuer and Dinka tribes of South Sudan who are living