Towards Transforming Ethnic Conflicts in Uganda’s Rwenzori Region
There
are various interpretations of ethnic conflicts that inspire debate. In this
essay I do not intend to engage in debate on the concept “ethnic conflict”
instead, I will use the notion ethnic conflict in its very general connotation,
referring to ethnically manifested conflicts. I am persuaded that there is
nothing ethnic in conflict. Some scholars have made use of certain concepts in
the quest to explain ethnic conflicts, but not without controversies. For
example, Kaplan (1998) argues that the “ancient hatred” that exists between and
among ethnic groups is often revived and fueled by incompatible claims to
rational self-determination and political sovereignty leading to violent
conflicts. This view is shared by Callahan (1998) and it has recently spread
among policymakers with the prospects for preventing and settling ethnic
conflicts (Wimmer, 2004, p. 3).

However, right from the onset of this essay I challenge the notion of “ancient hatred” as a source of current ethnic conflicts in Africa due to its deleterious nature. It is my reasoned position that one does not hate another just because of one’s ethnic identity. There is nothing ‘ethnic’ about conflict, and there is nothing ‘ancient’ about conflict. Conflict is just conflict and is manifest in a multiplicity of ways. Behind every conflict, whether expressed in terms of ethnic identity, religion, gender, profession, political persuasion etc, there exists other elements in its under-surface such as; exploitation, competition over resources, social-political and cultural exclusion, and so on. Hence the term ‘ancient hatred’ is loaded with some ideological luggage which is prejudicial and does not help in addressing the historical and actual grievances a group may have. It is important to move away from a filament of thought that portrays African ethnic conflicts as having something ‘irrational’ for instance as demonstrated in the expression of Kamplan’s (1998) “ancient hatred” that prevents the realization of modern rational nation-state. The ethnic conflicts in Uganda’s Rwenzori region are not based on, neither are they expressions of “ancient hatred.” There are various other reasons for the existence of such conflicts and this essay comprises of a practical analysis of factors underlying ethnic conflicts in the Rwenzori as a pragmatic approach to conflict transformation which according to Lederach (2003) is “an orientation, an approach and a framework. Transformation is a lens and a strategy for approaching conflict.

However, right from the onset of this essay I challenge the notion of “ancient hatred” as a source of current ethnic conflicts in Africa due to its deleterious nature. It is my reasoned position that one does not hate another just because of one’s ethnic identity. There is nothing ‘ethnic’ about conflict, and there is nothing ‘ancient’ about conflict. Conflict is just conflict and is manifest in a multiplicity of ways. Behind every conflict, whether expressed in terms of ethnic identity, religion, gender, profession, political persuasion etc, there exists other elements in its under-surface such as; exploitation, competition over resources, social-political and cultural exclusion, and so on. Hence the term ‘ancient hatred’ is loaded with some ideological luggage which is prejudicial and does not help in addressing the historical and actual grievances a group may have. It is important to move away from a filament of thought that portrays African ethnic conflicts as having something ‘irrational’ for instance as demonstrated in the expression of Kamplan’s (1998) “ancient hatred” that prevents the realization of modern rational nation-state. The ethnic conflicts in Uganda’s Rwenzori region are not based on, neither are they expressions of “ancient hatred.” There are various other reasons for the existence of such conflicts and this essay comprises of a practical analysis of factors underlying ethnic conflicts in the Rwenzori as a pragmatic approach to conflict transformation which according to Lederach (2003) is “an orientation, an approach and a framework. Transformation is a lens and a strategy for approaching conflict.
In this essay I build
on Lederach’s conception of conflict transformation, an approach through which
new things can be build out of destructive relational and practical challenges.
The central goal of conflict transformation according to Lederach (2003) is “to
build constructive change out of the energy created by conflict.” In conflict
transformation the energy that causes destruction is rechanneled towards
analysis of underlying relationships and social structures and towards
construction of strategies that can affect relationships positively. Conflict
analysis aimed at conflict transformation should revolve around thinking and bringing
about strategies for constructive change. The aim is to move conflict away from
destructive processes and direct it toward constructive ones. Identification of
factors that have caused violence and death and destruction in the Rwenzori
over the years will help policy makers and peacebuilders in redirect
destructive elements of relations into positive tenets of social
transformation. This include; celebration of ethnic diversity as opposed to
fighting over difference in ethnic identity; increasing of production as
opposed to competition and fighting over scarcity and so on. The primary task
of conflict transformation is not to find quick solutions to immediate
problems, but rather to generate creative platforms that can simultaneously
address surface issues and change underlying social structures and relationship
patterns (Lederach, 2003). While the government has since managed the conflict
though military intervention, I think, this is the right time to go deeper into
conflict analysis in order to embed conflict transformation ideology and
strategies not only to avert recurrence of conflict in the Rwenzori but also to
effect a shift to positive conflict outcomes.
Background and context
On
the 5th of July, 2014 the Rwenzori region of western Uganda, specifically
the districts of Bundibugyo and Kasese, witnessed a wave of violence with armed
assailants attacking villages, police stations and army barracks. By the end of
the day the death toll was over 70 people, including civilians and security
forces (CLED 2014). This was the most recent in a series of episodes of armed
violence in the Rwenzori region. While this particular incident is remarkable,
this article does not entirely dwell on it since, since as I argue hereafter,
the violence was a culmination of deep-seated historical issues that have
largely remained undressed.
This
essay is based on my continuous engagement with the communities in the conflict
zone of Rwenzori following the violent clashes in July 2014. Under the synergy for peace project being
implemented by Human Rights Network-Uganda (HURINET-U), I have had a rare
opportunity to continuously and profoundly engage the parties to conflict in
the Rwenzori region. In the course of project implementation, August, 2014 –
July, 2015, I have taken keen interest in studying and analyzing the dynamics
of the ethnic conflicts in Rwenzori that date back many decades in order to
have an acumen of the real issues underlying the said conflicts and the factors
that continue to exacerbate them. I am therefore writing from the real life
narratives, personal experiences from numerous encounters with members of the
communities snared in the conflict and various actors engaged in efforts for conflict
termination and peacebuilding in the Rwenzori region. These include; NGOs,
religious leaders, cultural institution leaders and government officials at
district and sub-county levels. The members of the communities that I have mostly
interacted with are the Basongora, Bamba, Bakonzo, and Batuku communities of
Rwenzori.
Through
a theoretical stance of conflict transformation as developed by John Paul
Lederach, I place my argument within the strategies of conflict transformation
to elucidate on key conflict underlying factors in the Rwenzori. In my view this
is important, since it is implausible to think of transforming a conflict whose
causes are either unknown or misrepresented. Rather than “ancient hatred”, between
various ethnic groups in the Rwenzori, I think there are various relational,
structural and interest-based issues touching on identity and resources coupled
with politics that continue to sustain the conflicts. Misinformation or lack of
information on such issues, has led to a series of failed interventions both by
the state and non-state actors.
Understanding conflict
There
are numerous expressions in regard to definitions of conflict. The crosscutting
conception is that conflict is normal and that it generally refers to incompatibility
of interests that occur when disagreement and differences point at different
goals or different ways of pursing a similar goals. Ethnic conflicts are not
different, they sprout from interests expressed in identity. Identity is responsible
for bonding groups together. Naturally the group sets certain mechanisms for
its own survival and defense against the ‘other’ with whom it has incompatible identity
and/or interests (Ssentongo, 2014). Conflicts have a function and such a
function has to be managed well to avoid violence. In order to understand a conflict
there is need to go beyond the mere misunderstanding and visible differences.
This is the key towards understanding identity.
Conflict is a universal feature of human
society. It takes its origins in economic differentiation, social change,
cultural formation, psychological development and political organization – all
of which are inherently conflictual – and becomes overt through the formation
of conflict parties, which come to have, or are perceived to have, mutually
incompatible goals. The identity of the conflict parties, the levels at which
the conflict is contested, and the issues fought over (scarce resources,
unequal relations, competing values) may vary over time and may themselves be
disputed. Conflicts are dynamic as they escalate and de- escalate, and are
constituted by a complex interplay of attitudes and behaviours that can assume
a reality of their own. Third parties are likely to be involved as the conflict
develops, and may themselves thereby become parties in an extended conflict. An
important point to note from the outset is how early theorists in the field
such as Morton Deutsch (1949, 1973) distinguished between destructive and
constructive conflict, suggesting that the former was to be avoided but the
latter was a necessary and valuable aspect of human creativity (Ramsbotham, et al, 2011. pp. 7-8)
Conflict
transformation is not about groups agreeing; it is about them understanding one
another. The issue should be on how to help one another in order to attain each
one’s goals. This calls for a robust conflict analysis that is informed by the
social psychology that requires a good comprehension of the social processes
and psychologies of groups involved in the conflicts in Ruwenzori through
continuous constructive engagement. Conflict transformation relies heavily on
analysis. If one gets the analysis wrong then the means of resolving will
equally be wrong and the other way round is true. There is no known better ways
of dealing with violent conflicts other than dealing with them in a
constructive way; this is what conflict transformation is all about (Lederack,
2003).
Ethno-politics and conflict
Politics
is one of the major elements that greatly shape ethnic conflicts. Some
practitioners have identified politicization of ethnicity and ethnicization of
politics as a major dimension to conflicts prevalent in ethnically polarized
societies (Simiyu, 2011). Ojielo (2013) blames crude politicization of the
tribe on ethnic related conflicts in Kenya’s Rift Valley and northern Uganda.
In the Rwenzori region where ethnic conflicts have been prevalent, the
political dimension has equally taken center stage. For instance in the recent
study conducted by Kabarole Research Centre (KRC, 2012) political machination has
been singled out as an important driver of conflicts in the Rwenzori.
The
politicization of ethnicity is according to Wimmer (2002, p. 3) a result of the
overlapping and fusion of three notions of peoplehood; the people as a
sovereign entity; the people as citizens of a state and finally, the people as
an ethnic community. As a sovereign entity the people exercise power through
some sort of democratic procedure; as citizens the people hold equal rights
before the law and lastly as an ethnic community, the people are
undifferentiated by distinctions of honour and prestige, hence are held
together by common socio-political destiny through shared values often referred
to as culture. Smith (2003) argues
that the politics and morals of
political membership is determined by peoplehood. The said peoplehood is over-achingly
constructed around the commonality in identity.
According
to the typical conflict analysis done by Kriesberg et al (1989), it is
agreeable that identity is a major cause for intractability of ethnic
conflicts. While appreciating the existence of identity and its contribution to
ethnic conflicts, Boulding doing a forward to the work by Kriesberg et al (1989)
demonstrates the opportunities and possibilities of managing and transforming
such conflicts. According to Boulding, (Kriesberg et al. 1989: viii) “there are
no unresolvable conflicts, only conflicts in which the parties stubbornly
resist solutions. Intractability itself is not intrinsic to a conflict
situation.”
Furthermore
Kriesberg et al (1989) argue that the tractability of conflict changes over
time. Following his argument it is important therefore to identify and
cultivate the conditions of change from intractability to tractability. Social
contexts change over time, and the nature of conflicts changes as the contexts
change. Even the nonnegotiable core construct of social identity that every
individual and group brings to a conflict, that which makes the world
predictable and manageable for each party, is subject to changes as social contexts
change (Kriesberg et al. 1989: ix-x).
Persistence
of ethnic conflicts around the world and particularly within countries in
sub-Sahara Africa portends a crisis that calls for a rethinking of strategies
and nuanced approaches to ethnic conflict transformation as well as the civil
society and, other actors on this process. Ashutosh (2011) has attempted to
explore the possible links between civil society and ethnic conflicts from
which analysis two interconnected arguments have been drawn. Along this
analysis is developed an argument that interethnic networks that are created
through positive involvement of the civil society in ethnic conflicts are
agents of peace since they help to build bridges and to manage tensions. This
is what has been done severally in the past strategies by the civil society in
Rwenzori. However recent development, for instance, the eruption of violence in
July 2014 indicates that efforts by the civil society have hitherto not born
fruit. Again looking at the broader argument developed by Ashutosh (2011) there
appears a pointer to such tractability and persistence of ethnic conflicts in
Rwenzori. In regard to these conflict Ssentongo (HURINET-U 2014a) quoting Dugan
(1996) points out the issues that complicate the ethnic conflicts in Rwenzori.
According to this latter analysis Ssentongo (HURINET-U 2014a) indicates that
the system, the subsystem, the relationships and the issues are mixed up in a manner
that leaves the civil engagement almost impotent at the face of conflict
underlying factors.
Going
back to Ashutosh (2011) hypothesis there is a claim that communities organized
only along intra-ethnic lines and where interconnections with other communities
are either very weak or do not exist, ethnic conflict is most likely. During a
training conducted in Fort Portal (HURINET-U 2014a), a senior official from the
Ruenzururu made a claim that his kingdom has been kind enough and has over the
years accommodated other communities and cultural institutions in the region,
an assertion that was immediately protested by leaders from other communities
present during the forum. This shows the freshness of the issues that Ashutosh
(2001) was pointing out in ethnic conflict analysis. In that analysis one of
the major arguments is that intra-ethnic and inter-ethnic engagements can
proceed either through associational forms or every day forms depending on
whether the interaction is formal or informal (Ashutosh 2001).
At
the formal level the Ruenzururu kingdom which has been since recognized by the
state holds a view that it accommodates the rest of the communities, a stand
that is vigorously contested by other groups who view the Ruenzururu as playing
the big brother role thus undertones of dissatisfaction, typical of the
theories of greed and grievance. The weakness of such an engagement according
to Ashutosh (2001) remains an open space for violence no wonder in July 2014
there was witnessed an outbreak of another wave in the series of violence in
Rwenzori with the non-Bakonzo decrying the Bakonzo dominance in the region. The
political dimension to this paradigm cannot be lost in sight. Indeed the
associational forms turn out to be studier than day to day interaction when
confronted with attempts by politicians to polarize and fragment the different
groups of people along ethnic lines for purposes of gaining political capital.
Background to ethnic conflicts in
Rwenzori
The
Rwenzori region covers the districts of Bundibugyo, Ntoroko Kabarole, Kyegegwa,
Kamwenge, Kyenjojo, and Kasese. The region is endowed with natural resources
such as minerals, geographical features of mountains, rivers, lakes, wild life
and vegetation that are of great significance to the tourism industry in the
country. Culturally, the region is constituted of a multiplicity of
ethno-cultural communities that include the Bamba, Babwisi, Batwa, Batuku,
Basongora, Bakonzo, Batooro and Banyabindi among others. Of the many cultural
communities; the government of Uganda has officially recognized three cultural
institutions namely; Obusinga Bwa Rwenzururu (Kingdom of Rwenzururu), Obudingya
bwa Bamba (Kingdom of the Bamba) and Obukama Bwa Tooro (Kingdom of the Tooro);
and allowed them to set up administrative structures culturally. This has prompted
other cultural communities in the region, specifically the Basongora and the
Banyabindi to demand for recognition as independent cultural institutions as
provided for both in the Constitution of Uganda (1995) and the Institution of
the Cultural Leaders Act (2011). Their demands have not yet been honored by the
central government yet it continues to draw a lot of criticism and tension in
the region (HURINET-U 2014 b).
The
region has experienced conflicts over access to and control of resources
including water, land, and the national park, and splitting of the current
Kasese and Bundibugyo districts to more districts. This is in addition to other
domestic, political, economic and cultural issues in Rwenzori. Whereas the
indicators of such conflicts have been characterized by violent incidents of
confrontations in the past, the recent developments, for example, the denial of
Omusinga’s visit to Kasenyi landing site which is regarded as a cultural site
as well as Bundibugyo on 30th June 2013 are indicative of an escalating
level of ethnic conflicts. This is a situation that calls for initiatives to
mitigate and transform the different forms of conflict in the region. The
problem with such conflicts is that if they become persistent, they not only
deter social cohesion, democratization, tourism and economic development (The
constitution of Uganda 1995), but also endanger human and national security as
well as making the region a potential launch for national conflict by elements
that harbor ineffectual and disruptive interests in the region.
The
Rwenzori conflicts are among the most violent armed conflicts that Uganda has
ever experienced. Many people have lost lives, many others have been left with
both physical and mental injuries, property of unknown value has been destroyed
and indeed the social fabric is greatly affected. For instance in the recent
violent incidences in July, 2014 about 70 people were killed in Bundibugyo,
Ntoroko and Kasese districts. The aftermath of the violence is definitely
painful traces of injury, loss and destruction.
The
history of Rwenzori portends armed conflicts and violence. From 1964 to 1980
there was insurgency resulting from the Rwenzururu movement, 1981 to 1986 there
was the National Resistance Army (NRA) war and from 1986 to 2001, the Nation
Liberation of Uganda (NALU) and the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF). This
background of militarism, armed conflicts, insurgencies and waves of violence
is indicative of deep rooted issues that go beyond natural ethnic differences.
The parties to ethnic conflicts in
Rwenzori
The
primary actors in the conflicts in Rwenzorin are the ethnic groups found in the
region. This is clearly a multi-ethnic conflict involving a number of ethnic
groups. While there are many other minority ethnic groups in the region, it
appears that so far the ongoing and long standing issues that have been the
triggers and drivers of the conflicts in the region are issues between the
Bakonzo, Bamba, Basongora and Bawisi ethnic groups. The Bakonzo are accused of
trying to play a big brother role in the region, a fact that is heavily, and at
times violently, contested by the other groups. For instance during a training
in Fort Portal one representative of the Bakonzo said that “we have
accommodated the other groups very well.” This statement was vigorous opposed
by members of the other groups present thus revealing the manner in which
ethnic relationships in this region remain wanting. HURINET-U which was the
organizers of the meeting through Judi Erongot [legal associate Uganda
Coalition on the International Criminal Court (UCICC) and focal person National
Transitional Justice Coalition, Uganda (NTJC-U)] put a disclaimer by asserting
that “it is derogative to use the term accommodation since it belittles the
other group and it amounts to abuse; it is not allowed in law and therefore
HURINET-U calls on the members to avoid using such terms since they are not
only legally unacceptable but also breed division among groups” (HURINET-U,
2014a).
On
the other hand in Bundibugyo the Bamba and Bawisi claim to be the indigenous communities
in the area and they therefore cannot be dominated by the Bakonzo who are
believed to be squatters in the region. While the Bamba and the Bawasi hold a
view that they are the indigenous communities in the region, the Bakonzo are
one of the majority ethnic groups in the region with one of the biggest
cultural institutions duly recognized by the state. This has only helped in
heightening the rift between different ethnic groups in a situation typical of
the greed and grievance theories of conflict (Wimmer 2004).
This
article highlights the background to the three major ethnic groups in the
Rwenzori region that have majorly been engaged in long standing ethnic
conflicts with deeper underlying issues of identity and resources. This brief
overview of the said communities lays the background upon which conflict
analysis can be drawn and its dynamics evaluated.
The Bakonzo
The
Bakonzo are a bantu-speaking people who reside on the slopes of the mount
Rwenzori (mountains of the moon), a place where they have lived for many
generations. According to an official description of the Bakonzo, they have a
culture that is well adapted to the steep slopes and climatic conditions of the
Rwenzori which they have shared with the Bamba community for many years. Mostly
inhabiting the neighboring Bundibugyo district, the Bamba community is very
close in lineage and culture to the Bakonzo people of Rwenzori. Both these
communities prior to historical colonialism maintained certain forms of
government based on councils of elders.
However
upon the emergence of colonialism, this situation changed drastically since the
Bamba and the Bakonzo were placed under the neighboring Batooro who had a
centralized kingdom (Larner 2014). The Bakonzo started a resistance movement
called the Rwenzururu movement. In a bid to win their struggle for
independence, the Bamba and Bakonzo created a strong alliance that eventually
strengthened the Bakonzo. This has transited into the current cultural
institution of Obusinga Bwa Rwenzururu, headed by a cultural leader (king)
called Omusinga (HURINET-U, 2014a).
The Basongora
The
Basongora are a bantu-speaking people living at the foothills of Mt. Rwenzori,
next to Queen Elizabeth national park in Kasese district. They are largely a
cattle keeping community with a few members of their ethnic group engaged in
crop farming and fishing for their economic livelihoods. They trace their
origin from Ethiopia through South Sudan to Bunyoro, then finally Busongora in
Rwenzori where they are found today.
Within
East Africa, Basongora are believed to belong to the ancient Chwezi dynasty
that had its headquarters at Bigobya Mugyenyi in the current Sembabule
district. They are kins to the Bahima of present Nkore community of
southwestern Uganda which constitutes the colonial districts of Mbarara and
Bushenyi, which have since been split into more administrative local government
districts as well part of the Hema of Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo and
the Batuku of Ntoroko district.
The Banyabindi
The
Banyabindi are an ethnic minority group (EMG) living alongside the Basongora
and Bakonzo in most of the sub counties in Kasese district, western Uganda.
They are the indigenous bantu-Runyakitara speaking community who allege to be
the first indigenous ethnic community to inhabit the foothills of mount ‘Rwezoora’
commonly known as Rwenzori in Kasese district, the former Busongora county of
Bunyoro Kitara-kingdom after the disintegration of the great empire.
The
Banyabindi originally belonged to Bunyoro Kitara kingdom and were ruled by the
king of Bunyoro (CDRN 2008). They are estimated at a population of 12,722 (The
National Housing and Population Census 2002). Although their original name is
not widely known, the Banyabindi claim to have acquired their current name as a
nickname from the Bakonzo. It is believed that the Bakonzo (mountain people) came
down and found people whose name they did not know, and because the ‘unknown
people’ took their milk from a beautiful pot called ‘Rubindi’, the Bakonzo
decided to call them the ‘Banyabindi’. This is the name by which they are known
even up to date.
Issues underlying ethnic conflicts
in Rwenzori
The
causes of the recent clashes in the Rwenzori region are both due to historic
and immediate triggers. While through conflict analysis it is possible to
establish the conflict underlying factors, this article can in no way purport
to give the scale of human rights violations in Rwenzori region. It is
therefore the considered opinion of the author that the full scope of human
rights violations and abuses is a matter that calls for further investigation
and documentation to enable the actors to appreciate the gravity of the issues
and make informed interventions.
This
article is therefore only an evidence-based analysis of the conflict dynamics,
some of the issues underlying the conflict and an attempt on the prospects for
conflict transformation based on existing theories and prevailing
circumstances. The author holds a view that the conflicts in the region are
very complex and intertwined such that it often gets confusing in the process
of analysis.
In
order to avoid any such confusion this article classifies the issues underlying
ethnic conflicts in Rwenzori into two broad categories. Furthermore the article
briefly highlights the issues following each ethnic group. While the depth of
the issues and analysis cannot exhaustively be laid down in this article, the
fundamental factors are hereafter clearly highlighted.
Underlying historical issues
On
the historical stance this article points out the following key issues. The
first major issue is land. Land is most certainly an emotive issue
(Simiyu 2011) in
many parts of the world and it has over the years emerged as one of the major
causes of the most violent conflicts that the world has known (Boone 2013).
The
manner in which members of different communities in Rwenzori talk about the
land question reveals deep and long standing issues that continue to cause and propel
the conflicts in the area (HURNINET-U 2014b). For instance the following quote
from a group work report during one of the forums in Fort Portal may help to
point out what groups think about land as a cause of conflict in the region.
“Land is one of the major issues in Rwenzori and it has greatly affected
communities here. There is a problem of stigmatization and discrimination
against certain groups based on the areas they occupy or perceived outsiders
based on where they are believed to come from” (HURINET-U 2014a). Another
participant in the forum opined that “the issue of land and where one comes
from can be seen in the disrespect for others and discouragement of
intermarriage between and within different ethnic groups which is becoming
rampant” (HURINET-U 2014 a).
Land
and land resources in the region have been key in as far as conflicts are
concerned. For instance in Kasese district, the Bakonzo believe that the
Basongora are occupying the parts of the district with all the valuable
resources in the region such as the lakes, the national park, salt pans, cement
factory while the Bakonzo are left to occupy the mountainous parts of the
district with fewer resources.
Other
natural resources such as oil discovery has been associated with increase in
land disputes (KRRC & RFPJ 2012). The question of unresolved land
redistribution among the Bakonzo, Basongora, Banyabindi and other ethnic
minorities following the historical and unresolved cases of land grabbing
continue to resurface in contemporary conflicts, especially in Kasese district.
The Basongora, for example, claim that the colonial government grabbed their
land and turned it into a National Park. Besides, the Banyabindi also claim
that their land was grabbed by the Bakonzo during the Rwenzururu rebellion and
it has never been returned to them such as Kisinga, Kitojo, Kichamba, Muhokya,
Kilembe, Mahango, Kyarumba, and Munkunyu.
The
above factors have occasioned incidents of violent conflicts, and have
continued to perpetuate tension and hegemony among the different ethnic groups
in the region. For instance in Muhokya sub-county in Kasese, the Banyabindi are
complaining of selective government distribution of land resources. The
government was said to have distributed land to the Basongora and Bakonzo,
leaving out the landless Banyabindi who have been living in what would be
described as camps for the past 50 years (KRRC & RFPJ 2012).
It
is upon the land question that the notion of identity emerges and hence
ethnicity. Group identity is so much emphasized in the Ruwenzori area; the
question is why? Why is the group identity so salient? Sometimes according to
Ssentongo, it is about the history; what has happened in the past is used to
explain the conditions of a group in the present (HURINET-U 2014a). Every time
incompatibility of interest occurs, the group will use the calamity of the
collective trauma that happened in the past to explain their situation. This
process is trans-generationally inherited and people of all ages will almost
always go back to such explanations thus forming a cycle that is almost hard to
locate its start leading to conflict protraction.
The
people of Rwenzori therefore may be lost in issues of ethnicity and identity
thinking that these are the causes of conflict while in reality conflict issues
transcend the tribe and the ethnic group and touch on land and resources found
on the same land that are actually survival needs. This has led to structural
violence visible in the region.
In
its most straightforward understanding, structural violence is the kind of
violence that is embedded in the structures and systems whereby the system
gives unequal chances and opportunities. The violence is the difference between
what is and what should be, for instance denial of what belongs to an
individual or a group is violence in itself. The different ethnic groups in
Rwenzori decry dominance of some groups over others based on land resource
distribution and land use.
The
Bamba believe that the Bakonzo have bought a lot of land from them. In
Bundibugyo, the Bakonzo stay mostly in the hills and mountains whereas the
Bamba/Babwisi inhabit the low lands but because of the commercial usefulness of
land in the lowlands, the Bakonzo have joined the others down to engage in
economic activities. This has not gone down well with the Bamba/Bawisi who perceive
this to be an intrusion on their means of survival. However, according to some
observations, they believe that the Bamba/Bawisi are willing sellers and the Bakonzo
are the willing buyers (HURINET-U 2014a).
On
the other hand, the Rwenzururu movement war veterans have not been reintegrated
into the community. These veterans are associated with a number of demands
including land on the lower plains of the district that is predominantly
occupied by the Basongora and Banyabindi. They continue to feel left out by the
government. They also feel dissatisfied with government for making empty
promises to their plight. This is one of the historical issues that has led to
the build-up of the conflicts in the region. For long, the region has provided
sanctuary for rebel groups like the Rwenzururu movement, the Nation Liberation
of Uganda (NALU) rebels and lately the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF). These
have only historically helped to militarize the region and make conflicts
prevalent thus protracting the conflict situation in Rwenzururu.
Conflict escalating factors
Apart
from historical issues whose solid basis is the land ownership and use, some of
the following highlighted issues can be categorized as intervening factors that
have exacerbated the conflict leading to violent eruptions especially the most
recent one in July 2014.
The
first attendant issue is handling of the land question. For instance the manner
in which government has handled land redistribution remains unsatisfactory. The
land redistribution framework in which land was redistributed at a ratio of 1:3
acres to Bakonzo (farmers) and Basongora cattle keepers respectively. This
framework has been vigorously contested by the Bakonzo who feel it was favoring
the Basongora.
The
discovery of oil in the Albertine grabben has created anxiety among the local
communities and different kingdoms and cultural institutions in Rwenzori on who
will control the royalties accruing from oil resource thus complicating the
land issue among different ethnic communities in the region.
Lastly,
the politicization of land and identity issues has lately made the conflict
situation more complicated and its termination elusive. Politicians at both
central and local government levels have taken advantage of the volatile
situation in the region to gain political capital among the local communities
by creating political camps that are based on the different ethnic groups
touching on land and identity. The politicians easily appeal to identity and
security to gain the political capital for their survival.
The
Bakonzo of Bundibugyo feel left out of all the political appointments in
Bundibugyo. They claim that none of the major political and administrative
positions in the region, from the Resident District Commissioners (RDCs) to the
LCVs (Local Council 5 Chairpersons), are given to a Mukonzo in Bundibugyo
instead they all go to the Bamba/Babwisi ethnic group. As a result, it is
claimed that this has led to political domination of Bamba/Babwisi over the
Bakonzo. The Bakonzo claim that since Bundibugyo was granted a district status
in 1974, no Mukonzo has ever been chairperson LCV (Local Council 5). This according
to them means that all political decisions are made by the Bamba/Babwisi.
Currently, the chairman LCV belongs to the Bamba/Babwisi ethnic group and out
of a district executive committee of five members, only one is a mukonzo; the
vice chairman. This to the Bakonzo is discrimination against them in Bundibugyo
(HURINET-U 2014a).
According
to Ssentongo “ethnicity concerns the groups, it is about the boundary.
Boundaries include symbols, believes, territory, culture, religion, common
ancestral heritage etc (HURINET-U 2014a). Boundaries bring about the sense of
belonging and security. Security is a condition where the satisfaction of basic
human needs is stable and predictable. Basic human needs according to Burton
(1990) is identity. The politicians have mastered so well the art of invoking
the people’s identity a fact that easily triggers violence. This underpin the
recent violence and the visible tension in the region especially this time of
political importance as Uganda heads to elections.
Marginalization
Feeling
of disregard among the Bakonzo by Bamba/Babwisi of Bundibugyo has been one of
the contributing factors to the recent clashes. The Bamba argue that the
territory belongs to them and that the Bakonzo belong to Kasese district. The
situation is further complicated by the fact that in 1974, President Idi Amin
Dada granted district status to the Bakonzo of Kasese (Rwenzori) and the
Bamba/Babwisi of Bundibugyo (Semuliki) along tribal lines. Because of this, the
Bakonzo community in Bundibugyo feel marginalised when it comes to securing of
jobs and political representation in Bundibugyo.
The
Bakonzo have on several occasions asked the president to grant them their own
district curved out of Bundibugyo in the part of the district that they occupy in
Bughendera county, an issue contested by the Bamba/Bawisi to solve the long
standoff among communities that have been living in harmony.
Cultural institutions
The
demand for cultural institutions by other ethnic groups in the region is a
contentious issue. For instance, the Basongora in Kasese district are regarded
by the Bakonzo as occupying the geo-cultural space of the Obusinga Bwa
Rwenzururu, an issue that has recently come to the limelight.
In
addition, despite the existence of the Tooro kingdom in the Rwenzori
sub-region, the government of Uganda has created two more kingdoms in the same
geo-cultural area of the Tooro; Obusinga bwa Rwenzururu and Obudhingya bwa
Bamba.
The
Rwenzururu kingdom covered the districts of Bundibugyo, Ntoroko and Kasese. Therefore,
the further curving out of Obundhigya bwa Bamba cultural institution was not
well received by the majority of the people who subscribe to the Rwenzururu
cultural institution hence culminating into the recent clashes (HURINET-U
2014a).
Other commercial interests
It
is believed that most of the business enterprises in Bundibugyo town belong to
the Bakonzo. Secondly, Bundibugyo district earns 33 billion shillings annually
from the sale of cocoa which is farmed in the low lands where Bakonzo are the
prominent farmers. The engagement of Bakonzo into a number of economic
activities does not seem auger well with the Bamba who believe that these are
not the indigenous owners of the land on which they are making fortune
(HURINET-U 2014a).
Impact of ethnic conflicts in
Rwenzori
There
is no serious independent comprehensive documentation of the human rights
violations and abuses committed during and in the immediate aftermath of the
clashes. While interacting with the community members and organizations working
in the region, it is clear that there are widespread human rights abuses and
violations. Although there is a lull for lack of physical clashes violence at
the moment, the communities remain engulfed in a state of fear for further
possible attacks and reprisals from the rival ethnic groups.
Generally
ethnic clashes in Rwenzori have led to far reaching consequences including
death, displacement of people from their homes, torture and injuries as well as
loss of property whose value has not been comprehensively assessed. Other
negative impacts include torture of suspects by security operatives and summary
executions, lack of enough medical supplies especially to those who sustained
injuries during the violence, alleged training of one ethnic groups by the
police as crime preventers and deepening tribal divisions that pose a threat
not only to local peace process but also to national cohesion and integration
(HURINET-U 2014a).
Towards ethnic conflict
transformation in Rwenzori
In
cases of severe ethnic conflicts and ethnically divided societies,
establishment of the conditions necessary for effective intergroup
peacebuilding is an arduous task. Experts of conflict transformation identify
development of preconditions which convince competing groups to enter into
constructive dialogue quite fundamental (Lederach 1995). This would entail
convincing the rival groups that there are opponents to whom it is worth
talking to and that actually the issues of contention are superfluous to their
groups as such.
Going
forward, it is imperative that rival ethnic groups, who in this case are
parties to conflict, to understand and appreciate that it is probable to create
operational vicissitudes favorable to stable peace and that an agreement that
can lead to attainment of each group’s basic concerns is indeed plausible. Attainment
of such a conviction is good basis for sustainable dialogue on peaceful ethnic
conflict transformation. To this effect and in a hearty navigation of theories
of conflict transformation some scholars opine that a clearer articulation of
the aforementioned strategies greatly improve the conceptual and practical
search for settlements to severe ethnic conflicts (Ross 2000) such as the ones
experienced in Uganda’s Rwenzori region for decades.
The
recent clashes and conflicts in the Rwenzori region emanates from the long
historical injustices that cut across all the ethnic groups in the region as
highlighted here. Given the complexity of issues, conflict transformation in
Rwenzori require a broader framework that brings together government, the civil
society, the local communities, religious actors, cultural institutions and
other stakeholders in the region to promote harmony, unity, and reconciliation
among the locals for long lasting peace in the region.
This
article brings to the surface some key issues that contribute to the ethnic
conflicts in Rwenzori as well as the most recent violence in the region. These
issues range from; economic, social-cultural to political factors. As it has
been here indicated the discovery oil deposits in the region could be a factor
for conflict exacerbation if not well handled. The recent violence is an
opportunity for conflict transformation since its analysis points out the
unresolved grievances associated with land and resources, structural violence
and governance, and a history of militarization (KRRC & RFPJ 2012) that
calls for intervention.
The
issues underlying ethnic conflicts in Rwenzori are largely constant, for
instance, there is a long standing issue with the Basongora’s ancestral grazing
land that is sustaining the conflict. The resources are very critical but the
problem is with harnessing the available resources for the good of the people
of Rwenzori. It is important therefore to look at the ability of the people to
sustainably utilize available resources. Since the people are the key to either
creation of conflicts or prevention of the same, different groups should not
talk in a very defensive way for instance while there is need to have equal opportunities
in employment it is also important to look at the capabilities and expertise that people have. While it is wrong
to give people employment based on ethnicity, it is equally wrong to give
employment to people who are not qualified in the name of ethnicity.
There
is need therefore for the different groups in Rwenzori to unshackle themselves
through education and other life skills that will see them move out of cycles
of land conflicts, and help them attain employment based on merit and expertise.
Coexistence is the most important way, for instance, as a people of Rwenzori
region there is need to work together in looking for ways to mobilize resources
and create wealth for development.
Experts
in conflict studies have in the past pointed out that there is a strong
correlation between poverty and conflicts. The economic landscape of the
Rwenzori region is comparatively low than other parts of the country. There is
need for actors in the process of conflict transformation to look beyond mere
strategies for positive alteration of conflict such as sustained dialogue and
negotiation and embrace a robust development agenda to unlock the economic
fortunes of the region and turn around the frequent land and resource-based
conflicts. For instance if the various ethnic groups in Rwenzori worked
together for development projects with mutual benefits their grievances would
significantly wane in the process (HURINET-U 2014b).
Conclusion
The
absence of a collective voice and critical mass is visible in the Rwenzori
ethnic conflicts; a factor that leads to a lot of problems especially on
conflict transformation. It is arguably true that the more the people and the
communities in Rwenzori continue to engage in the conflicts, the national
development programs will continue to bypass them thus perpetuating
marginalization and structural violence.
It
is very important to continue the dialogue on what are the really issues in
Rwenzori. For instance when talking about land, the questions should be on:
what land? Whose land? Where is the land? What is the size of the land? How
should the land be utilized? Who should utilize the land? These set of
questions set part of the fundamental questions that should form the basis of
discussion and drive the conversation on both structured and unstructured
dialogue that should be deliberately initiated and sustained in the process of
conflict transformation. This article postulates that a proper understanding of
the underlying issues would form a basis for conflict transformation in
Rwenzori.
References
Armed
Conflict Location and Event Dataset (ACLED) 2014. Really time analysis of
political
violence across Africa. An examination of recent ethnic
violence in the Rwenzori region
of Uganda. Available from: [Accessed 15 January 2015].
Boone,
Catherine 2013. Land conflict and distributive politics in Kenya. African
Studies Review,
55 (1), pp. 75–103. Burton, John 1990.Conflict Resolution
and prevention. New York, St.
Martin’s Press.
Community
Development Resource Network (CDR) 2008. An Overview of the history, cultural
practices and development c hallenges of the Banyabindi
ethnic community. Kampala,
CDRN
Daniel
Christie 1997. Reducing direct and structural violence. The human needs theory.
Peace
and conflict: Journal of peace psychology, 3(4), 3pp.
15-332.
Eller,
Jack D 1999).From culture to ethnicity to conflict: An anthropological
perspective on
international ethnic conflict. Michigan, University of
Michigan Press.
Human
Rights Network-Uganda (HURINET-U) 2014a. Assessment of the state of the conflicts
in the Rwenzori sub-region. Kampala, HURINET-U.
Human
Rights Network-Uganda (HURINET-U) 2014b. A report on peacebuilding and human
rights training held in Rwenzori on the 25th and
26th November, 2014 under the
synergy for peace and justice
program. Kampala, HURINET-U.
Kabarole
Research Centre (KRC) and Rwenzori Forum for Peace and Justice
(RFPJ) 2012. Stuck in the mist: Contextual analysis of the
conflict in the Rwenzori
region. Available
from: [Accessed 28 January 2015].
Kriesberg
L, Northrup T A, and Thorson S J 1989 .Intractable conflicts and their
transformation.
New York, Syracuse University Press.
Larmer,
Milles 2014. Ethnic patriotism and the east African revival: A history of
dissent, c.1935-
1972, by Derek Peterson, R. The journal of imperial and
commonwealth history, 42(3),
pp. 585-587.
Lederach,
John 1995.Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. New
York,
Syracuse University Press.
Miall,
Hugh 2004. Conflict transformation: A multi-dimensional task. Transforming
ethnopolitical c onflict. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
pp. 67-89.
Mue,
Njonjo 2013. Transitional justice process in Kenya and the implications on the
ICC
intervention. Paper presented at the conference for the ICC
process and its implication for
Kenya, 26 September, 2013, in Hekima Institute of Peace
Studies and International
Relations (HIPSIR), Nairobi.
Ojielo,
Ozonnia 2013. Justice versus reconciliation, the dilemmas of transitional
justice in
Kenya: In Omeje, Keneth and Hepner eds. Conflict and
peacebuilding in the African
great lakes region. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.
Ross,
Marc H oward 2000. Creating the conditions for peacemaking: theories of
practice in
ethnic conflict resolution. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 23(6),
pp. 1002-1034.
Skjelsbaek,
Inger and Smith, Dan 2001. Introduction, in gender peace and conflict. London,
Sage
Publications.
Simiyu,
Robert 2011. Militianisation of Resource Conflicts: The case of land-based
conflict in
the Mount Elgon region of western Kenya. Monograph,
Institute for Security Studies.
The
Cross-Cultural Foundation of Uganda (CCFU) 2014. Managing inter-cultural
conflict in the
Rwenzori Region. Available from: [Accessed 22 January 2015].
The
Republic of Uganda 1995. The Constitution of Uganda. Available
from [Accessed 8 January
2015].
Varshney,
A 2001. Ethnic conflict and civil society: India and beyond. World Politics.
53, pp
362-398.
Wimmer,
Andreas ed. 2004. Facing ethnic conflicts: toward a new realism. Maryland,
Rowman
& Littlefield.
Wimmer,
Adreas 2002. Nationalist exclusion and ethnic conflict: shadows of modernity.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Lederach, John Paul. "Conflict Transformation." Beyond Intractability. Eds.
Guy Burgess and
Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of
Colorado, Boulder. Posted: October 2003 <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/transformation>.
Ramsbotham, O., Miall, H., & Woodhouse, T. (2011). Contemporary conflict resolution.
Polity.
Towards Transforming Ethnic Conflicts in Uganda’s Rwenzori Region
Reviewed by Ibrahim Magara
on
April 20, 2017
Rating:

No comments: