Child Soldiers Or War Affected Children?

Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers

Margaret Angucia

In many places around the globe, over many The concept of ‘child soldiers’ and the centuries, adults have forcibly involved children humanitarian industry in war. In more recent times, these forcibly involved Despite this long history of children’s invol- children have come to be collectively referred to as vement in war, the etymology of the word ‘child soldiers’, in an attempt to address the crises ‘child soldiers’ is not clear. For their part, the that these children experience within war con- international legal frameworks concerning ditions. However, recent ¢eld experiences from children and war, speci¢cally the Conven- northern Uganda show that children, formerly tion on the Rights of the Child (1989), The abducted by the Lord’s Resistance Army, as well African Charter on the Rights and Welfare as the community they return to, do not consider of the Child (1990) and the Optional Proto- themselves as soldiers. This paper explains the col to the Convention on the Rights of the reasons why the children reject this categorisation Child on the Involvement of Children in and prefer to be regarded as war a¡ected. This Armed Con£ict (2000) do not use the term paper concludes with the warning that erroneous child soldiers. On the other hand the bench- categorisation of war a¡ected children might mark, United Nations commissioned, The in£uence, and/or undermine, the e¡ectiveness of Graca Machel Report (1996) study on targeted intervention programmes. the impact of armed con£ict on children employs the phrase. Keywords: abducted children, child sol- It is UNICEFand the NGO Working Group diers, northern Uganda on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in their Cape Town symposium, that ¢rst de¢ned a child soldier as: Introduction Historically, there are myriad examples ‘Child soldier ...any person under 18 years of of children being used in war, as combat- age who is part ofany kind of regularor irregu- ants; however, it is really over the last few lararmedforce orarmedgroup in any capacity, decades in Africa that this use of children includingbut not limited to cooks,porters,mes- has come to prominent attention. Studies on sengersand anyoneaccompanyingsuchgroups, children and war in Africa have been done other than family members.The definition in Liberia (Sendabo, 2004), Mozambique includes girls recruited for sexual purposes (Lea‹ o, 2005; Maslen, 1997) and Angola and for forced marriage. It does not, therefore, (Imogen, 2005, Human Rights Watch, only refer to a child who is carrying or has 2003), among others. This involvement of carried arms’ (UNICEF,1997). children in war has led to this group of children to be commonly referred to as Although o¡ering a de¢nition does not ‘child soldiers’. amount to being the authors of the term child

soldiers, this seems a clear indication that international community i.e., donors and the use of the concept originated from the charities, action by the UN and often the humanitarian quarters. Since then, writers establishment and enforcement of speci¢c (such as Eichstaedt (2009) ‘First Kill your international legal conventions to avert Family: Child Soldiers of Uganda and the Lord’s similar events in the future. This kind of Resistance Army’; Sendabo (2004) ‘Child activism lay behind the creation of the Inter- Soldiers: Rehabilitation and Social Reintegration national Criminal Court (ICC) that, in part, in Liberia’; Human Rights Watch’s (2003), also hopes to bring to justice those involved ‘Forgotten Fighters: Child Soldiers in Angola’; and in the use of children in armed con£ict and Skinner (1999) ‘Child soldiers inAfrica: ADisas- £agrantly abuse them. This has succeeded ter for Future Families’) have used the concept through the conviction of Thomas Lubanga, to refer to children who have been through of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, war, even if such children were forcibly by the ICC in March 2012. Equally, among abducted. the charges brought about against Joseph A decade after the Cape Town symposium, Kony of Uganda is also the use and abuse the Paris Principles (initiated to update the of children in his long campaign of terror original Cape Town Principles using a child in the Great Lakes Region of Africa. rights based approach) did not use the con- In understanding the notion of the ‘¢re cept ‘child soldiers’.The Paris Principles refer brigade’ attitude, Skinner (1999, p9) refers to to children who have been caught up in the ‘reaction, usually espoused by members armed con£ict as simply children, or boys of nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) and girls. This is understandable, given that working with child soldiers [that] view them the document admittedly ‘incorporates know- as victims or tools of unpopular military ledge and lessons learnt in particular, emphasizes regimes or brutally unscrupulous warlords. the informal ways in which boys and girls both Hence, the ¢re brigade attitude consists of become associated with and leave armed groups’ two, interconnected, pillars: (1)a humanitar- (UNICEF,2007:5). ian problem associated with hapless victims; The kind of nomenclature used, and in£u- and (2) a need for resources to address it. It enced by, the earlier Cape Town Principles seems striking that in both of these two is what the author has referred to elsewhere pillars, children are conceptualised as being as a ‘¢re brigade’ attitude (Angucia, 2009; objects of their condition. In this article, 2010). It is a type of language that appeals the author explores whether this conceptual- to the emotions, and appears to drum for isation of children accounts for children’s support to act and/or raise awareness of the lived experiences. In speci¢c terms, addres- issue of children caught up in con£ict. This sing how ¢eldwork has documented how is especially true in the west, where the in- formerly abducted children operate as human experiences of people in the third agents and subjects of their own situation, world caught up in political turmoil are and how they emphasise their wish to de¢ne sometimes inconceivable. It is understand- themselves not as‘child soldiers’,but as individ- able, considering the scale of humanitarian uals a¡ected by war. crises that humanitarian organisations often In analysing children’s lived experience, the have to avert during such political turmoil author addresses how Murphy’s model of and con£icts. This ‘¢re brigade’ categorisa- ‘child soldiers’ (2003) may provide a relevant tion of war a¡ected and formerly forcibly conceptualisation of the phenomenon under conscripted children, therefore, seems to study in northern Uganda. Murphy (2003), resonate with a loud cry to do something. in light of military patrimonialism and Often, it is a cry for more ¢nancial and clientalism in Liberia and Sierra Leone, other resources, such as the backing of the describes four models of child soldiers. His

Copyright © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.357 Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

‘coerced youth model’ views child soldiers as been understood that the con£ict is the victims of coercion into military conscrip- manifestation of historical and larger tion.The ‘revolutionary youth model’ views them political issues in the history and politics of as revolutionary ideologists who would like Uganda. Speci¢cally, the Ugandan North/ to change their society, and the ‘delinquent South divide, created as a result of a colonisa- youth model’ views child soldiers as delin- tion project, has been seen to be the major quents, who seize the opportunity to be cause (Ginywera-Pinchwa, 1989; Veale & soldiers as a way out of life on the streets.. Stavrou, 2003; Allen, 2006). Murphy’s fourth model, the ‘youth clientalism Apart from President Museveni’s govern- model’, explains the relationship between ment, the other immediate protagonist of commanders and children as providers of the two decade long con£ict in northern social and economic protection and security Uganda is Joseph Kony, the leader of the in exchange for military labour, (obedience) LRA. In January 1986, the rebel National and service.This, he says, is the case in failed Resistance Army (NRA), led by Yoweri or weak states, but also rooted within cul- Kaguta Museveni, overthrew the then ture. Lutwa government. The defeated national As this article shows, through discussion of army,dominated by theAcholi ethnic group, empirical data, the experience in northern £ed homewards to the north and eventually Uganda of formerly abducted children became the breeding ground for various suggests that this group of children provide rebellions that fed into each other, but ulti- an account that closely matches Murphy’s mately coalesced around Kony’s LRA. concept of coerced youth model. Yet, on the Historical as the causes of the con£ict may basis of analysis, the author argues that refer- be, its impact on the present day Acholi ring to these children as ‘child soldiers’is population is unprecedented in terms of unwarranted, as war a¡ected and formerly mutilations, displacement and related abducted children who formed the bulk of trauma. The most unique characteristic of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) appear the con£ict, however, is the overwhelming to reject that reference based on their experi- and brutal use of children by the LRA. It is ences of captivity. Equally, the communities said that up to 80% of the LRA were for- to which these children return are sensitive merly abducted children, forcefully taken to referring to the children as former sol- away from their homes, on the way to school, diers. In the following paragraphs, the or sleeping at night. Some were in the gar- article explores how the lived experiences dens with their parents or just running of formerly abducted children show their ordinary errands around the displaced rejection of identifying and understanding people’s camps that had become home themselves as soldiers, and what is at stake during the con£ict (Angucia, 2010). These in how they make sense of their involvement abductions are the primary way in which in con£ict. Before addressing empirical ¢nd- an estimated 30,000 children in northern ings, the historical and political context of Uganda came to be categorised as ‘child children’sengagement incon£ict in northern soldiers’, or preferably war a¡ected, formerly Uganda is brie£y outlined. abducted children.

How children became involved in the Fieldwork: how do children con£ict in northern Uganda make sense of their involvement Children’s involvement in armed con£ict in in con£ict? northern Uganda is part of the collateral The ¢eldwork this article is based on was damage of a long political struggle, post conducted as PhD research1 in northern independence, in Uganda. It has generally Uganda, in three phases from April 2006 to

Copyright358 © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Angucia

December 2008. A total of 255 parents, kill you must do it, even if the person was teachers, community elders and non abduct- related to you ^ in the process he will have to ed school going children were involved in forgive you, because it was not your wish to do focus group discussions (FGD) and in-depth it, but it was order from above. It is a must for interviews. Formerly abducted children were youtokillthat person, even ifshe was related to asked to recount their episodic life histories, you, in case you refuse to kill they will instead from the time of abduction up to the point kill you’ (child mother, interviewed at that the author was talking with them, at Gusco, 2006, also quoted in Angucia, home with their parents, at the reception 2010). centres or in schools. There were a total of 27 such histories. These data were collated As canbe seen from this quotation, this child and analysed to generate codes, families mother’s narration of the ordeal of war and themes for the write up. Children telling children in the LRA camps does not re£ect their story of captivity and escape, expres- the attitude of a soldier, but that of a sing their inner struggles and putting in victim-perpetrator; just part of the many words what they were and were not is a children who have been a¡ected by war, in powerful way to de¢ne what they could be their case in the battle ¢eld. Granted, being considered, and not what other people think. a child soldier is not just the event of abduc- This struggle to de¢ne themselves is called tion, but also a becoming through processes agency. of bonding, training and experiences of violence committed and witnessed that the Forceful abduction is at odds with children go through (Angucia, 2010). How- children as soldiers ever, after abduction and while in captivity, Abduction was a hallmark of the con£ict in the formerly abducted children in northern northern Uganda, as has been recorded by Uganda provide accounts of complex pro- humanitarian agencies, human rights organ- cesses of rejecting the process of becoming isations and the media (see for instance, soldiers. Eichstaedt, 2009; Allen, 2006; World Vision, 2004, Women‘s Commission for Refugee Rejection of being a soldier through Women and Children, 2004, Veale & Stav- use of language and bonding rou, 2003). This forceful abduction into the The process of rejection of being a soldier is rebel forces, vis-a' -vis the connotations of not a single event, or a consistent refusal soldiering as associated with the profession- to engage in acts of violence or killings or al science of the military and being an taking part in ambushes and so on; it is informed chosen career as a source of live- shown in language used to distance them- lihood, is at odds with children as soldiers. selves from their captors, such as ‘they’^ the rebel commanders ordered ‘us’^the abductees to kill that man. In one example ‘There were very many battles being fought ^ of an interview with a formerly abducted the Mamba vehicle stepped on very many and young mother this rejection of the use of killed us. I also narrowly survived, I could not ‘we’and‘they’ is explicit. walk any more, but luckily enough, I was handed over to a kind person who gave me only a radio to carry and the only problem I faced Interviewer: ‘Did you loot people’s proper- was running in the battlefield and travelling ties?’ because I was to follow him wherever he could Formerly abducted young mother: go. And the other problem was the killing of ‘No we didn’t do it ourselves, it was the your fellow abductees.When they order you to rebels who did it and we carried’.

Copyright © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.359 Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

Interviewer: ‘How about burning people’s characterised the war, they did so primarily properties?’ for survival purposes. Formerly abducted young mother: ‘No we didn’t burn.Butthey were kill- Soldiering as agency ing people by butting their heads’. During interviews, some of the children Interviewer:‘Were you not abducting people would admit that they had killed, burnt on your way?’ homes and places, looted, or ambushed, but Formerly abducted young mother:‘as we would always add that if you did not do it move on they kidnap, but if you get tired ‘you will be killed’. and fail to walk they kill you’ (author’s emphasis, interviewed at ‘When they order you to kill, you must do it, Gusco, 2006). even if the person was related to you, in that process he will have to forgive you, because it The children viewed themselves as ‘prisoners’ was not your willto do it, but it wasorder from and the rebel commanders as ‘soldiers’. The above. It is a must for you to kill that person, narration below from a young girl who even ifshe was related to you, in case you refuse returned from captivity blind clearly illus- to kill they will instead kill you’(inter- trates this: viewed at Gusco, 2006).

‘...The women rebel soldiers did not In fear, they choose to save themselves by like us; they could falsely accuse us of what doing bad things, which is both a contradic- we did not do. ...they could accuse us that tion and a dilemma that Honwana (2008, we the prisoners were witches....’ p10) refers to: (author’s emphasis, interviewed at Lacor, IDP camp, 2006) ‘It is difficult to regard Marula (a ‘childsol- Another level of rejecting association with dier) as simply a victim who was compelled the rebel soldiers was a form of bonding to kill and therefore bears no responsibility for between the abducted children. This was his act of parricide. Yet his responsibility is always a risk, but the children would try to different from that of a young man who kills ¢nd time to talk to each other about their his father for some imagined benefit. Civil plight, plans for escape and to encourage war and peace engender distinct moral each other. A child mother, who was taking environments. Rather than conducting a phil- care of other younger girls in captivity, osophical inquiry into the degrees of guilt reports how they discussed their escape. attributable to children and youths coerced into civil wars, the point here is to try and under- ‘Then at night I started calling one of the girls stand the new identities they develop in the I used to take care of. I was looking after two interstitial positions’. girls ...I called her and I said Achii today is my day of going back home, if you people are This paper argues this negotiating of iden- interested, then follow me, but if you don’t feel tities in captivity is not only the essence of like you can still staybehind. ...I just want to the victim/perpetrator notion of children take you back home’ (child mother inter- within war contexts, it also indicates a form viewed at Gusco, 2006). of agency, even though one with negative consequences. Boas & Hatloy (2008), refer- Hence, it seems that in as much as the ring to Honwana (2008, p71) delineate ‘tacti- formerly abducted children of northern cal agency’from‘strategic agency’. Tactical Uganda participated in the atrocities that agency is explained as being narrow and

Copyright360 © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Angucia

opportunistic, meant to cope with concrete, the di⁄culties they would encounter bring- immediate conditions of the war environ- ing up their children in the absence of their ment, while strategic agency is of a longer bush husbands, either still in the bush or timeframe, based on a position of power dead. and a degree of control over self and decision making processes. To this author, these are ‘I am now left with one child, the other one representations of reactive agency and passed away ...It is impossible for me now proactive agency, respectively. Based on to go back to primary school because of this these concepts, the data show how children child, ...the father of the child also passed caught up in war conditions in northern away two months after I had escaped’ Uganda were reactively taking positions of (child mother interviewed at Kitgum, tactical agency,as they were not in a position 2006). of proactive strategic agency. In this case, it could be argued that reactive tactical agency What becomes evident in these fragments is is a weapon for self-preservation. that these girls understand themselves and their worlds primarily through the lens of Child mothers’ preference for their motherhood, rather than from the motherhood against soldiering perspective their past experiences as ‘coerced Of many of the girls who had to become soldiers’. ‘wives’ to the rebel commanders, many of course became ‘child mothers’, yet another of Escape from LRA as a way of those ambiguous terminologies. In their distancing histories, the girls did not dwell on their roles Another strategy of distancing themselves as soldiers. Becoming a‘wife’ had given them from soldiering, most of the formerly a higher social status and di¡erent kinds of abducted children literally escaped from privileges in the bush (Angucia, 2010), LRA captivity. They left behind the most becoming a mother was something they obvious symbol of soldiering, the gun.Those were at ease to be. Potentially re£ecting what who escaped with it, used it as a tool for is acceptable in the socio-cultural context, security and protection against anticipated motherhood was respectable, whereas being dangers, including surprise attacks from a bad soldier, especially for girls, was not a the UPDF, the pursuing LRA and wild social bene¢t. Thus, di⁄culties of mother- animals. On arrival home, they surrendered hood at ayoung age under abnormal circum- the guns to the authorities without con- stances in captivity apart, the girls rejected ditions. If the escaped children of northern being a soldier in favour of motherhood. Uganda were interested in soldiering as a profession, they would have set political con- ‘Then I told him that if they really know that ditions for giving up their guns. They did this pregnancybelongstothem, we should leave not; they were children who had been this place and go back home.Think about my abducted against their will, they did not age, do you think that I can deliver in such a have Murphy’s revolutionary ideas men- harsh environment. ...Then from Khartoum tioned above, not even patrimonial/client I gave birth and then after sometime the aero- relations with the rebel commanders, they plane flew us to Kitgum’ were simply coming home. They expected (child mother interviewed at Kitgum, only acceptance back home. In the following 2006). paragraphs, how their histories were understood within the discourse of humanitarian Even on their return home, they viewed organisations and the children’s commu- themselves as mothers ¢rst, often envisaging nities are explored.

Copyright © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.361 Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

The nature of reintegration centres is still of children who are not sol- programmes in northern Uganda diers. points to war a¡ected children, rather than soldiers R: ‘...because most of the activities in the Perhaps the idea that the formerly abducted centres here really address the problems of the children of northern Uganda are not, after children and the challenge ...this is a recep- all, soldiers was behind the reception pro- tion centreand it is just a temporary placeafter grammes in northern Uganda. There were a minimum of three weeks to one month. ...by no formal disarmament, demobilisation that time, we want the child to be psychologic- and reintegration (DDR) programmes, the ally educated and the child will be stable in children only came to ‘psychosocial recondition- their mind.The challenge might come from ing’ centres for a few weeks and were then the community where ...in the camps [they] sent home after the Uganda Amnesty Com- are given all the kinds of [problems] ...the mission provided themwith Amnesty certi¢- different activities and the treatment we have cates. On being asked in a FGD, the sta¡ of been giving them from the centre for quick Gulu Support the Children Organisation recovery might no longer be there at the camps. that was central in receiving the returned So the challenge may come again from home, children, spoke of how their programme but from the centre here at least all these have was centred on war a¡ected children, and been catered for. Normally ...we go up to the not on soldiers. community...So it is up to the scouts to address their issues.They have to talk about R2:‘Yah, when you look at these children they the problems and the need to work with chil- are part and parcel of us.They look like people dren, but with special emphasis on formerly who can still do something in future’. abducted children’ R3: ‘They look like people who are innocent, (FGD with Gusco Staff, 2006). but they have been forced to do things against their will’. This focus on war a¡ected children, and not R4: ‘Personally, I look at these children as on soldiers, in northern Uganda contrasted disadvantaged children, because when you the creation of demobilisation camps in compare them with children elsewhere in the other countries, such as Sierra Leone and country, the experiences these children go Liberia, as well as the children’s court in through are beyond compared to these other Sierra Leone where the DDR programmes ones’. were a big part of the transition from war R5: ‘In most cases when these children to peace (van Gog, 2008; Krijn, 2006). come, they come with the conceived ideas in their minds that when you come to the centre, Communities helping to redeem lost this is what they are going to do for you. So childhood and not soldiers what we do is give them at least some time, Within the communities in northern so as when you interact with them theyget that Uganda, formerly abducted children are confidence [with you] or with the environ- viewed as part of the broader group of chil- ment’ dren a¡ected by war, but speci¢cally con- (FGD with Gusco Staff, 2006). sidered as formerly abducted children (lotino ma ki mako). In local parlance, when Even while preparing the children for reuni- the children are referred to as child soldiers ¢cation with their families and life within (lotino lo mony), this occurs in a negative, the community to which they return, the disparaging sense. It often happens when focus of the caregivers in the reception someone is unhappy with the exhibit of

Copyright362 © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Angucia

unacceptable behaviour by formerly ab- This was exhibited in the use of language ducted children. Otherwise, the formerly to refer to the children in the community as abducted children are seen as ‘our children’by formerly abducted children (lotino ma ki parents and elders,‘our brothers and sisters’and mako), instead of child soldiers (lotino lo mony). playmates in school settings by peers. When Therefore, it seems the widespread use of asked why use this mode of language despite the word‘child soldier’withinthe international the atrocities committed by these children, discourse, especially as de¢ned by the Cape the answer was always because it was Town Principles, may be initiated by the not their fault that they were abducted, humanitarian fraternity, but does not su⁄- echoing the argument that abduction into ciently contain the complexities and lived rebel forces is not the same thing as an experiences of these children and commu- informed choice of soldiering as a career. nities involved. Yet, this does not mean that the community ignores the actions of these children while Exploring how these ¢ndings could they were in captivity. In fact, conversations relate to Murphy’s model of ‘child indicated how families and communities soldiers’ acted watchfully over the conduct of for- Murphy explains that di¡erent models of merly abducted children, in order to help child soldiers can be used to holistically them correct negative behaviour that had explain child soldier-hood, as presented been acquired during captivity. However, above. His categorisation of ‘child soldiers’in decency and part of the healing process Liberia and Sierra Leone does not neatly demands the use of less harmful language. sit in the experiences of the formerly During the interviews with non abducted abducted children of northern Uganda. school children, these peers emphasised The coerced youth model alone could par- how referring to formerly abducted children tially explain the experiences of formerly in terms of their ‘soldiering’ past is an o¡ence abducted children in northern Uganda, as that is punishable in school. In other words, forcibly abducted persons, but it does not communities are giving formerly abducted explain their rejection of any association children the opportunity to redeem their with soldiering by means of language use. lost childhood, and heal themselves of the By rejecting any association with their rebel horri¢c experiences that occurred while commanders shows that the fact they were in captivity. coerced into a military group does not necessarily make them child soldiers. Discussion In comparative terms, Murphy’s other This study has shown how children, when categorisations do not ring true in northern invited to provide an understanding of their Uganda. As was demonstrated, the con£ict lived experience of being involved in con- in northern Uganda did not have any clear £ict, emphasise a distance from their experi- ideological nor political rooting, even from ences in captivity, and especially their its founders. Thus, the revolutionary youth association with soldiering. By referring to model could not explain the use of child sol- themselves as‘us’and the rebels as‘they’, com- diers in northern Uganda. Also, to reject plemented this distance by seeing themselves the delinquent youth model, the children as ‘prisoners’ and not as soldiers. Equally, abducted in northern Uganda were not although stigmatisation and fear of the for- delinquents on the streets, or otherwise. merly abducted children does exist within These were children abducted from their northern Ugandan communities, an attitude families, on the way to school and or in their of trying not to forever label these children gardens. Additionally, taking into account in reference to their past experience prevails. the nature of the con£ict in northern

Copyright © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.363 Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

Uganda, there was no traceable patrimo- Therefore, the indiscriminate use of an nial/client relations for social support and ambiguous concept like ‘child soldier’conjures economic purposes between the children con£icting images of a child, and then a and their captors. There could have been soldier, within a socio-cultural context some military use the children were put where people are not comfortable using to, in terms of being human shields on it, may sow seeds of resentment. This is the frontline, spying, carrying loot and so especially true if those using the concept on, but this type of relationship had not are outsiders who happen to be many in con- gone beyond the basic duties of a captured £ict ridden societies like northern Uganda, child. It is also not clear whether the and particularly working with international children were strictly attached to single organisations. commanders the whole time they were in the bush. In fact, there is evidence Implications for intervention that the children were frequently moved The use of language and concepts might between di¡erent ¢ghting units. Some- in£uence the nature and design of inter- times this was done to confuse the children vention programmes. If one is planning so that they would not run away.This auto- programmes for a former child soldier, it matically meant changing commanders, might mean that the philosophy behind and therefore breaking any possibilities of such a programme, or the priority of focus the development of Murphy’s patrimonial/ is the ‘soldiering’ past of the bene¢ciaries client relations. and as a result might focus on demobilisa- To conclude, these ¢ndings indicate that tion or traditional security related activi- widely used international concepts such ties. In contrast, planning a programme as ‘child soldiers’ and explanatory models for war a¡ected and formerly abducted should be applied sparingly, or guardedly, children might focus on rebuilding lost in speci¢c con£icts and socio-cultural con- childhood and creating opportunities for texts. Mentally, the concept conjures images building the future. Provision of support of a child and then a soldier who should services might include a focus on edu- normally be an adult skilled in soldiering; cational services, creation of psychosocial mental images that are rather di⁄cult to support, social safety nets and the devel- reconcile. Drawing on Honwana shows that opment of the general social services it is not just this research that ¢nds this con- needed within the community where such cept as a dilemma: formerly abducted children return. Having rejected the reference to soldiering, the ‘The binary child soldier produces an oxy- formerly abducted children and their com- moron, a hybrid that conflates victim and munities in northern Uganda might, there- perpetrator: child soldiers find themselves in fore, be choosing, through their use of an unsanctioned position between childhood language, a community wide social safety and adulthood.They are still undeniably very net focused intervention, as opposed to a young but no longer innocent; they acquire the security focused one. skills of seasoned soldiers but are not adults The inclusive use of language and reference yet. The possession of guns and a licence to to formerly abducted children, such as kill removes them from childhood. They are ‘our children’, also has implications for the locatedinatwilightzone;atransitionin target of intervention programmes. If which the worlds of childhood and adulthood a community does not isolate their for- ‘‘rub against each other in...uneasy inti- merly abducted children in terms of macy’’.’ language use and relationships, it would (Honwana, 2008, p10) be almost unacceptable for international

organisations to come into their com- Human Rights Watch, (2003). Forgotten Fighters: munity to provide assistance only to ‘child Child Soldiers in Angola,Vol. 15, No. 10 (A) ^ April soldiers’due to their experience in captivity, 2003. while all children and the community have been a¡ected by war, but di¡erently. Pro- Imogen, P. (2005). Youth Con£ict and Identity: vision of assistance to ‘former child soldiers’ Political Mobilisation and Subjection in Angola only identi¢es and further isolates and in McIntyre Angela (ed.) Invisible Stakeholders: stigmatises, in lieu of such assistance. It Children and War in Africa, Institute for Security is, therefore, in the best interest of all Studies, Pretoria, 45^66. parties to be aware of these de¢nitions Krijn, P. (2006). Footpaths to Reintegration: Armed and perceptions of local populations of con£ict, Youth and the Rural Crisis in Sierra Leone. war related social problems concerning Wageningen UniversityThesis. children. Lea‹ o, A. (2005). A Luta Continua: Children and Youth in Mozambique’s Struggles in McIntyre References Angela (Ed.) Invisible Stakeholders: Children and Allen,T. (2006).TrialJustice:The International Crim- War in Africa (31-44). Pretoria: Institute for inal Court and the Lord’s Resistance Army. London: Security Studies. Zed Books. Maslen,S.(1997).The Reintegration of War-a¡ected Angucia, M. (2010). Broken Citizenship: Formerly Youth: The Experience of Mozambique, ILO Action Abducted Children and their Social Reintegration in Programme on Skills and Entrepreneurship Northern Uganda. Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publish- Training for Countries Emerging from Armed ers. Con£ict,Vocational Rehabilitation Branch,Train- ing Policies and Systems branch, ILO. Angucia, M. (2009). Children and War in Africa: Murphy,W. (2003). Military Patrimonialism and The Crisis Continues in Northern Uganda. Inter- child Soldier Clientalism in Liberia and Sierra national Journal on World Peace, 26(3) September Leonean Civil Wars. African Studies Review, 46(2), 2009. 61- 87. Boas M. and HatloyA. (2008).Getting in, Getting Sendabo,T. (2004).Child Soldiers: Rehabilitation out’: militia membership and prospects for and Social Reintegration in Liberia, Life and reintegration in post-war Liberia. Journal of Peace Institute, Sweden. Modern African Studies,46(1), 33 55. Skinner, P. E. (1999). Child soldiers in Africa: A Eichstaedt, P. (2009). First Kill your Family:Child Disaster for Future Families. International Journal Soldiers of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army. onWorld Peace,16(2), June1999. Chicago, IL: Lawrence Hill Books. The Graca¤Machel Report (1996).‘Impact of Armed Ginywera-P. (1989). Is there a ‘‘Northern Ques- Con£ict on Children,’ http://www.unicef.org/graca/ tion’’? in Rupesinghe Kumar (Ed.), Con£ict a51-306_en.pdf. Resolution in Uganda. Melton, Woodbridge: James Currey and Ohio University Press. UNICEF (2007).The Paris Principles and Guidelines on Children Associated with Armed Forces or Armed Honwana A. (2008). Culture and \politics: War, Groups. At: http://www.unicef.org/emerg/¢les/ Reconciliation and Citizenship in Mozambique. Par isPr inciples 310107English.pdf. InauguralAddressas ProfessortothePrince Claus Chair in Development and Equity 2007/2008 on UNICEF (1997). Cape Town Principles and Best 1 April 2008 at the Institute of Social Studies, Practices. At: http://www.unicef.org/emerg/¢les/ The Hague,The Netherlands. Cape_Town_Principles(1).pdf.

Copyright © War Trauma Foundation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.365 Child soldiers or war affected children? Why the formerly abducted children of northern Uganda are not child soldiers, Intervention 2014,Volume 12, Number 3, Page 356 - 366

Van Gog, J. (2008). Coming back from the bush: World Vision (2004). Pawns of Politics: Children, Gender, Youth and Reintegration in Northern Con£ictandPeaceinNorthernUganda. Milton Keynes: Sierra Leone, African Studies Centre. African WorldVision. Studies Collection,9. 1 For full report and details of methodology see Violence, Recon- Veale, A. & Stavrou A. (2003). Angucia, M. (2010). Broken Citizenship: Formerly ciliation and Identity: The Reintegration of Lord’s Abducted Children and their Social Reintegration in Resistance Army Child Abductees in Northern Northern Uganda, Rozenberg Publishers. Uganda, Monograph, and Institute of Security Studies.

Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Margaret Angucia is a Senior Lecturer at the Children. (2004). No Safe Place to Call Home: Child Department of Good Governance and Peace and Adolescent Night Commuters in Northern Uganda. Studies, Uganda Martyrs University, Nkozi, New York: Women’s Commission for Refugee Uganda. Women and Children. email: [email protected]