U.S. Sends Military Advisers to Uganda

By Mary Stata on 10/19/2011 @ 05:45 PM

Tags: Peaceful Prevention

Late last week, President Obama notified Congress that over 100 U.S. military advisers are to be deployed to Uganda to help regional forces pursue the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). For over two decades, the LRA rebel group has threatened communities in northern Uganda and across central Africa by targeting civilians and abducting thousands of children. Even though the LRA is small in numbers, their attacks have wreaked havoc on the region and caused massive civilian displacement. Originally from northern Uganda, the LRA now operate in northeastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), southeastern Central Africa Republic (CAR), and South Sudan.

After losing patience in a peace process widely accepted as responsible for northern Uganda’s current stability, Uganda’s military teamed up with the DRC and South Sudan armies in late 2008 promising to rout the LRA and free abducted civilians once and for all. This joint offensive, dubbed Operation Lightning Thunder (OLT), failed to apprehend top LRA commanders, resulted in vicious backlash attacks on civilians, and caused the violence to spread to neighboring areas previously not affected. Thousands of civilians were displaced. The U.S. military supported OLT by providing technical and logistical assistance to the UPDF. OLT was widely condemned as a failure.

President Obama’s decision to send U.S. military advisers to Uganda comes a year and a half after Congress passed the Northern Uganda Recovery and Lord’s Resistance Army Disarmament Act of 2009. This bill garnered significant support from both sides of the aisle, despite the acrimonious and hyper-political atmosphere that characterized the 111th Congress. The legislation addressed long-standing reconstruction and humanitarian needs for Uganda and other communities affected by the LRA in central Africa. However the bill also requires the administration to develop “an interagency framework to plan, coordinate, and review diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and military elements of United States policy across the region regarding the Lord’s Resistance Army.” In accordance with the legislation, the Administration released its strategy last November. The deployment of military advisors is the most significant effort of the Administration to date to implement the strategy.

FCNL did not support the legislation due to concerns that the “interagency strategy” opened the door for renewed military operations. Given the current realities of U.S. foreign policy, military tools are privileged over diplomatic avenues or development efforts. Significant budget and personnel disparities, not to mention political support, favor increasing military might at the cost of disempowering civilian agencies such as the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development.

The deployment of U.S. military advisers confirm concerns that the main outcome of the “interagency strategy” would be another attempt to end the LRA crisis through military means. A military operation aimed at the LRA is not a new strategy. In addition to Operation Lightning Thunder, the Ugandan military tried in vain to eliminate the LRA through Operation North in 2001 and again through Operation Iron Fist in 2002. Even the United Nations’ peacekeeping force in DR Congo targeted the LRA in 2006. The result? Eight peacekeeping soldiers were killed, five wounded, and Kony remained at large. Again, the LRA responded with brutal retaliatory attacks on civilians. Clearly, the military option has been utilized and has failed every time to apprehend top commanders, demobilize the rebels, and protect civilians.

FCNL’s Peaceful Prevention of Deadly Conflict work seeks to recalibrate the imbalanced foreign policy toolbox so that the U.S. is equipped to prevent and mitigate crises such as those perpetrated by the LRA. Encouraging the United Nations to deploy peacekeepers to protect civilians at risk of LRA atrocities and applying the Complex Crises Fund in LRA affected communities are some alternative ideas to military means.

Until the U.S. foreign policy toolbox is filled with effective civilian tools for resolving problems and averting international crises, military options will remain the preferred modus operandi. It’s up to us to make sure Congress hears our support for civilian tools that help prevent killing before it starts.