UNDERSTANDING THE LONGSTANDING CONFLICT BETWEEN THE BANYAMULENGE AND "INDIGENOUS" TRIBES IN EASTERN DRC: WHY DO NEIGHBORS STRUGGLE TO COEXIST? by Bernard Jefferson. Londoni A dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Conflict Analysis and Resolution Committee: ___________________________________________ Chair of Committee ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Graduate Program Coordinator ___________________________________________ Dean, School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution Date: _____________________________________ Spring Semester 2017 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Understanding the Longstanding Conflict between the Banyamulenge and "Indigenous" Tribes in Eastern DRC: Why Do Neighbors Struggle to Coexist? A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at George Mason University By Bernard J. Londoni Master of Science George Mason University, 2011 Director: Karina Korostelina, Professor School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution Spring Semester 2017 George Mason University Fairfax, Virginia Copyright 2017 Bernard J. Londoni All Rights Reserved ii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to each member of my family, especially my wife Brigitte Londoni and son Mael Londoni. My family always encouraged me to go the extra mile and work hard. I am grateful to God for his unconditional support. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study wouldn’t take place without the participation of members of the Bafuliru and Bavira (known as Bavibafuliru by this study) and Banyamulenge communities. I sincerely thank members of these communities for accepting to be interviewed. I am eternally grateful for the insights participants provided to make this research a success. Their responses informed the creation of a model that can be used to reduce tensions and manage conflict in Uvira. This dissertation would not have been possible without the tremendous help, guidance and kind support of the supervisor of this research, committee chair Professor Karina Korostelina. Karina as well as other committee members, Professor Daniel Rothbart and Professor Elavie Ndura were always available; I am truly grateful for their enormous support. I am also grateful to all my professors and administrative staff at the School for Conflict Analysis and Resolution (SCAR). Special thank you to Professor Terrence Lyons, Sandra Cheldelin, Leslie Dwyer, Susan Hirsh, Arthur Romano, Thomas Flores, Agnieskza Paczynska, Richard Rubenstein, Mara Schoeny, Juliette (Julie) Shedd and Dean Kevin Alvruch for the rigor of training you provided me with and the knowledge you instilled in me. A special thank you is also addressed to my dear friends and family who inspired me throughout the years encouraging me to pursue my doctoral studies. I have in mind Dr. Mary Ryan, Mai Rebecca Zeigler Mano, Juan Camilo Tamayo, Fran Turner, Stefano Papaleo, Christine Childers, Dr. Anna Krift, Ann and Peter Demos, Jill and Gary Lewis, Kelly Londoni, Kapinga Ntumba and others who directly or indirectly supported me financially or morally. A special thank you to the Provost Office at George Mason University (GMU), which provided me with a grant to complete this dissertation to shorten my time for graduation. Without the school's financial support, it would take me one or two more years to complete this project. I sincerely thank the school from the bottom of my heart and I am grateful that the school was able to select me to be a recipient of such a prestigious award. Finally, I would like to thank my wife Queen Brigitte Londoni for the role she played in the completion of this research project. Brigitte continued to encourage me every single day to finish this dissertation even when I felt that I was burning down with the enormous iv amount of readings. Without Brigitte's sacrifice, (giving up her own time) just to allow me to burry myself in my books and escape to my study for long day and night hours, this wouldn’t be possible. Without Brigitte's understanding and kindness, the pursuit of this ambitious project would have died on day one. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES xvii LIST OF FIGURES xviii ABSTRACT xix CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: SETTING THE CONTEXT FOR UVIRA CONFLICT 1.1 Introduction ……………………………………………………………….. 1 1.2 Research problem statement …………………………………………….. 3 1.3 Purpose of study ………………………………………………………… 7 1. 4 Research questions ……………………………………………………….. 7 1.5 Research objectives ………………………………………………………. 8 1.6 Significance of the study ………………………………………………….. 8 1.7 Scope of the study …………………………………………………………. 12 1.8 Summary ………………………………………………………………….. 16 CHAPTER 2 THEORETHICAL FRAMEWORK THEORIES OF CONTACT, EMPATHY, LEGITIMACY, POWER, AND SOCIAL INDENTITY 2. 1 The issues …………………………………………………………………… 19 2.1.1 Intergroup conflict and coexistence ……………………………….. 20 vi 2.1.2 Intergroup conflict resolution ……………………………………... 30 2.1.3 Theoretical framework ……………………………………………… 33 2.2 THEORY OF CONTACT ………………………………………………….. 36 2.2.1 Contact hypothesis …………………………………………………... 36 2.2.2 Positive factors of contact ………………………………………….. 39 2.2.3 Negative factors of contact ………………………………………… 43 2.2. 4 Critics of contact ………………………………………………….. 47 2.2.5 Looking beyond mere contact ……………………………………… 50 2.2.5.1 Groups' interdependence …………………………………….. 50 2.2.5.2 Common ingroup identity to reduce intergroup bias ………... 53 2.2.6 Summary ………………………………………………………….. 58 2. 3 THEORY OF EMPATHY ………………………………………………… 59 2.3.1 Four forms of empathy ……………………………………………….. 60 2.3.2 Support for and strengths of empathy in improving relations ……… 63 2.3.3 Weaknesses of empathy in facilitating coexistence ………………… 66 2.3.4 Summary ……………………………………………………………. 70 2. 4 THEORIES OF LEGITIMACY AND POWER …………………………. 71 2.4.1 LEGITIMACY ……………………………………………………………. 71 2.4. 1.1 Definition of legitimacy …………………………………………….. 71 2.4.1.2 Legitimation vs delegitimazation …………………………………… 74 2.4.1. 3 Types of delegitimization ………………………………………….. 75 2.4.1.4 Importance of legitimacy ……………………………………………. 76 vii 2.4. 2 POWER ………………………………………………………………….. 78 2.4.2.1 Power as domination and control ………………………………….. 79 2.4.2.2 Power as decision making …………………………………………... 79 2.4.2.3 Power as legitimacy …………………………………………………. 80 2.4.2.4 Power and conflict ………………………………………………… 80 2.4.2.5 Summary …………………………………………………………. 83 2.5 TRUST AND TRUTH ……………………………………………………… 84 2.5. 1 Trust ……………………………………………………………. 84 2.5.2 Truth and mercy ……………………………………………………… 89 2. 6 SOCIAL IDENTITY THEORIES …………………………………………. 96 2.6.1 Definition …………………………………………………………….. 96 2.6.2 Social identity formation …………………………………………….. 97 2.6.2.1 Social categorization theory: self-categorization and optimal distinctiveness ………………………………………………………………………… 97 2.6.2.2 Self-categorization theory ……………………………………… 99 2.6.2.3 Optimal distinctiveness…………………………………………... 100 2. 6. 3 Theories of social boundaries (Tilly) ………………………………... 102 2. 6. 3.1 Tilly's eight compelling arguments about boundaries formation and change ………………………………………………………………………… 104 2.6.3.2 Why worry about citizenship boundary? ………………………. 105 2.6.3.3 Mechanisms of social boundaries …………………………….. 106 2.6.3.3.1 Mechanisms precipitating boundary change …………. 108 viii 2.6.3.3.2 Mechanisms constituting boundary changes ………… 111 2.6.4 Challenges for Us-Them Boundaries ……………………………… 115 3.6.5 Summary …………………………………………………………….. 117 2. 7 COGNITIVE AND EMOTIONAL THEORIES (COGNITIVE FACTORS). 119 2.7.1 Congruence/incongruence ……………………………………………. 119 2.7.2 Frustration-aggression and relative deprivation theories ……………. 121 2.7.2.1 Frustration-aggression ………………………………………… 121 2.7.2.2 Relative deprivation …………………………………………….. 122 2.7.3 Appraisal theory ……………………………………………………… 125 2.8 TOOLS FOR CREATING COEXISTENCE ………………………….. 127 2.8.1 Education as a tool for creating peaceful coexistence ………………... 127 2.8.1.1. Education for coexistence using school and societal approach … 129 2.8.1.2 Strengths and weaknesses of peace education …………………. 130 2.8.2 Tolerance as tool to create peaceful coexistence ………………………. 133 2. 9 Contact model for peaceful coexistence …………………………………. 137 2.10 Summary …………………………………………………………………. 141 CHAPTER 3 UVIRA CONFLICT BACKGROUND 3.1 The issue of Banyamulenge citizenship ……………………………………. 143 3.2 Government's role in delegitimizing Banyamulenge ………………………... 145 3.3 Country opens up to multi-party system ……………………………………... 147 3.4 First Congo War and its implication on ethnic divisions ………………….. 148 ix 3.5 The 1998 Second War: The Banyamulenge drop support for Kabila ………... 150 3.6 Signing of peace accord to end war …………………………………………... 154 3. 7 Proliferation of ethnic militia groups brings more tensions …………………... 155 3.8 Impact of wars on intergroup coexistence …………………………………… 158 3.9 Scholarly arguments and approach on Uvira Conflict ……………………….. 159 3.9.1 Land and ethnic issues …………………………………………………. 160 3.9.2 Power issues …………………………………………………………… 161 3.9.3 Citizenship issue ……………………………………………………….. 163 3.10 Overview of 2011 Uvira research and findings ……………………………. 165 3.10.1 2011 research findings ……………………………………………….. 166 3.10.2 Theory explanation of the 2011 research …………………………….. 169 3. 11 Applicability of four C model of identity-based conflict for Uvira ………… 171 3. 12 Study of coexistence in Uvira: Challenges of peacebuilding programs ……. 174 3.13 Programs reducing tensions and sustaining