For two years, the Government of Uganda and the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) have been involved in peace talks to end the twenty-two year war in northern Uganda. As a result of this process, northerners have experienced relative calmness and many internally displaced persons (IDP’s) are beginning to make their way home. Some are even buying cattle and sowing seeds.

Earlier this year, AFJN, Resolve Uganda, and many NGO’s in Uganda were hopeful that the peace process was on the cusp of completion. Each agenda item was vetted and the Final Peace Agreement (FPA) would allow for a rebuilding of the north and for a Ugandan high court to try LRA leader Joseph Kony and his cohort.

According to recent reports, the DRC military will pursue the offensive with intelligence support from Uganda, MONUC, and South Sudan.

Three civil society leaders came to Washington, D.C. last week to advocate for a firm commitment to the peace process, despite the talks’ weakened state. As people who have been affected by this conflict for nearly twenty-two years, they appealed to the U.S. government to stand firm in a peaceful resolution to the conflict. A military solution means that, inevitably, civilians from the Great Lakes Region will be caught in the middle.

Significantly, while the LRA is still looming large in much of central Africa, it has not terrorized Uganda for nearly a year and a half. Thus, while the war between the LRA and GoU still remains an obstacle to peace for the people of the north, it is now a regional issue that requires a multilateral solution and significant investment from several African nations, not just Uganda. Although we cannot rule out the threat of violence in the north, such a trend does allow for a separation between the LRA crisis and the humanitarian crisis that has crippled Uganda. The government should fulfill its obligations under the FPA and the international community should support the implementation of the Peace, Recovery, and Development Program (PRDP) in addition to pursuing a diplomatic solution to the violence in neighboring countries.

It is likely that without Kony, the LRA would dissolve. But the options for getting Kony out of the bush are limited; either force him to sign the FPA or pursue him militarily. Clearly, he does not see enough of an incentive to sign the peace agreement. Doing so would commit him to a trial in a Ugandan court and possibly an arrest by the International Criminal Court (ICC) if it decides to act on the warrants. Although a Ugandan trial is better than The Hague, Kony has instead chosen to remain in the bush. The other option, a military solution, will only cast a dark cloud over the recent signs of peace and will jeopardize the safety of civilians across the region.

The only sensible option remaining may be exile. If, as many civil society leaders believe, Kony’s primary concern right now is his security, the GoU and the international community should give it to him. Allow him to live without fear of prosecution in a foreign country with sufficient means to last him the remainder of his life. While many may see this as “rewarding” the criminals, it may be the only way to halt the violence and abuse that has plagued the region since Kony’s insurgency began twenty-two years ago. We cannot allow Kony to remain in the bush, abducting women and children, and killing innocent civilians.

If the international community is willing to keep the Juba peace process open, it should offer exile as part of the Final Peace Agreement. Under very few circumstances should the governments involved pursue military action against an army of abducted children, many of whom have been brainwashed to partake in Kony’s skewed worldview. The militaries in the region do not have the capacity to direct an effective strategy against Kony without endangering the innocent and unprotected.

The Juba Peace Process has brought peace to northern Uganda and has resulted in a good agreement. It just stops short of offering Kony what he really needs; if it cannot do that, we cannot expect him to come back to the negotiating table and we risk seeing an increase in violence in the Great Lakes Region of Africa.

By Beth Tuckey