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