-
The Cable
Rand Paul: You’re Arming al Qaeda’s Allies
-
War of Ideas
No, 3-D Printing Won’t End Hunger
-
Passport
Why Does the U.S. Get All the Tornadoes?
Posted By Joshua Keating
Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - 6:18 PM
Share
Click here to see photos of the evolution of the LRA.
Thanks to an incredibly effective social media effort, #StopKony is trending on Twitter today. The campaign coincides with a new awareness-raising documentary by the group Invisible Children. Former FP intern Michael Wilkerson, now a freelance journalist and grad student at Oxford -- who has lived and reported from Uganda -- contributed this guest post on the campaign. -JK
By Michael Wilkerson:
"Joseph Kony is basically Adolf Hitler. He has an army of 30 000 mindless children who slaughter innocent people in Uganda."
Have you seen something like that fly across your Twitter or Facebook feed today? Or perhaps this?:
"#TweetToSave the Invisible Children of Uganda! #Kony2012 Make Joseph Kony Famous!!"
"Kony 2012," a video posted by advocacy group Invisible Children to raise awareness about the pernicious evil of Lord's Risistance Army (LRA) leader Joseph Kony, has already been viewed over 8 million times on Vimeo and more than 9 million times on YouTube (and surely more by the time you read this) since its release this week.
It would be great to get rid of Kony. He and his forces have left a path of abductions and mass murder in their wake for over 20 years. But let's get two things straight: 1) Joseph Kony is not in Uganda and hasn't been for 6 years; 2) the LRA now numbers at most in the hundreds, and while it is still causing immense suffering, it is unclear how millions of well-meaning but misinformed people are going to help deal with the more complicated reality.
First, the facts. Following a successful campaign by the Ugandan military and failed peace talks in 2006, the LRA was pushed out of Uganda and has been operating in extremely remote areas of the DRC, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic -- where Kony himself is believed to be now. The Ugandan military has been pursuing the LRA since then but had little success (and several big screw-ups). In October last year, President Obama authorized the deployment of 100 U.S. Army advisors to help the Ugandan military track down Kony, with no results disclosed to date.
Additionally, the LRA (thankfully!) does not have 30,000 mindless child soldiers. This grim figure, cited by Invisible Children in the film (and by others) refers to the total number of kids abducted by the LRA over nearly 30 years. Eerily, it is also the same number estimated for the total killed in the more than 20 years of conflict in Northern Uganda.
As I wrote for FP in 2010, the small remaining LRA forces are still wreaking havoc and very hard to catch, but Northern Uganda has had tremendous recovery in the 6 years of peace since the LRA left.
So why is "Uganda" trending on Twitter?
Unfortunately, it looks like meddlesome details like where Kony actually is aren't important enough for Invisible Children to make sure its audience understands. The video, narrated by Invisible Children co-founder Jason Russell, says its purpose is to intensify pressure on the U.S. government to make sure Kony is brought to justice this year, and as the message broadcast throughout says, what is important is simple: Stop Kony.
Among other emotive shots, the video features Russell's attempt to explain the LRA to his toddler son, enthusiastic (and mostly white) volunteers putting up posters and wearing Kony 2012 bracelets, and some heart-wrenching footage of children who walked for miles to sleep in a safe place at the height of the LRA's power in Northern Uganda. The latter comprised much of Invisible Children's namesake first film and brought the organization to prominence.
But in the new film, Invisible Children has made virtually no effort to inform. Only once, at 15:01 in the movie, over an image of a red blob on a map leaving Northern Uganda and heading West, is the fact that the LRA is no longer in Uganda mentioned, and only in passing:
"As the LRA begain to move into other countries, Jacob [one of the children filmed in Northern Uganda in 2003] and other Ugandans came to the US to speak on behalf of all people suffering because of Kony. Even though Uganda was relatively safe they felt compelled to tell the world that Kony was still out there and had to be stopped."
That's it, in a 30-minute movie. And with both the graphic and reiteration of how awful the LRA is, you might think reasonably "move into other countries" meant expanding rather than fleeing. In any case, the focus, seconds later, is on Invisible Children's activities in the U.S. at the time, not what was happening back in Africa. I can see why some of P. Diddy's followers might be confused.
Award-winning Ugandan journalist Angelo Izama is among those not thrilled:
"To call the campaign a misrepresentation is an understatement. While it draws attention to the fact that Kony, indicted for war crimes by the International Criminal Court in 2005, is still on the loose, its portrayal of his alleged crimes in Northern Uganda are from a bygone era. At the height of the war between especially 1999 and 2004, large hordes of children took refuge on the streets of Gulu town to escape the horrors of abduction and brutal conscription to the ranks of the LRA. Today most of these children are semi-adults. Many are still on the streets unemployed. Gulu has the highest numbers of child prostitutes in Uganda. It also has one of the highest rates of HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis.
If six years ago children in Uganda would have feared the hell of being part of the LRA, a well documented reality already, today the real invisible children are those suffering from "Nodding Disease". Over 4000 children are victims of this incurable debilitating condition. It's a neurological disease that has baffled world scientists and attacks mainly children from the most war affected districts of Kitgum, Pader and Gulu."
Along with sharing the movie online, Invisible Children's call to action is to do three things: 1) sign its pledge, 2) get the Kony 2012 bracelet and action kit (only $30!), and 3) sign up to donate.
There is intense criticism out there over Invisible Children's finances, including that it spends too much money on administration and filmmaking, while still touting its on the ground NGO-style projects. Also, apparently it's never been externally audited. I'm going to stay out of that, other than to say you can check out IC's own financial disclosure information here.
What worries me more is that it's unclear what exactly Invisible Children wants to do, other than raise a lot of money and attention. Here's Russell in the video (21:40):
"We know what to do. Here it is, ready? In order for Kony to be arrested this year, the Ugandan military has to find him. In order to find him, they need the technology and training to track him in the vast jungle. That's where the American advisors come in. But in order for the American advisors to be there, the American government has to deploy them. They've done that, but if the government doesn't believe the people care about Kony, the mission will be cancelled. In order for the people to care, they have to know. And they will only know if Kony's name is everywhere.
So the goal is to make sure that President Obama doesn't withdraw the advisors he deployed until Kony is captured or killed. That seems noble enough, except that there has been no mention by the government of withdrawing those forces -- at least any I can find. Does anyone else have any evidence about this urgent threat of cancellation? One that justifies such a massive production campaign and surely lucrative donation drive?
There are many reasons uninformed and oversimplified advocacy can cause trouble, and Siena Antsis catalogues some of them here, noting that Invisible Children expertly "commodifies white man's burden on the African continent." Buy a bracelet, soothe some guilt.
But as researcher Mark Kersten notes, after "stopping Kony", then what? Or what if the activism just results the the 100 U.S. advisors staying but no Kony?
One of the biggest issues with a simplistic "Stop Kony" message is that discussions of Navy Seals or drone strikes are inevitable when patience runs out with Ugandan-led efforts . But what about the dozens or hundreds of abducted and brainwashed kids? Should we bomb everyone? Will they actually stop fighting after Kony is gone? What if they shoot back?
Coming back to the "Kony 2012" video and its celebrity endorsements, what are the consequences of unleashing so many exuberant activists armed with so few facts? Defining Uganda in the international conversation by issues that are either geographical misfires (Save northern Uganda!) or an intentional attempt to distract the international community (Death to the gays!), do a disservice to the many critical problems Uganda has.
In addition to the problems of poverty and nodding disease Izama highlights, Uganda is barely (if at all) democratic, and the president Yoweri Museveni ushered himself to a 4th term last year, taking him to over 25 years in power. Corruption is rampant, social services are minimal, and human rights abuses by the government common and well documented. Oh, and oil is on the way.
Stopping Kony won't change any of these things, and if more hardware and money flow to Museveni's military, Invisible Children's campaign may even worsen some problems.
Here's to hoping Kony hands himself in tomorrow and that the fear of the U.S. "cancelling" its LRA-hunt support is misplaced. But if the most impactful the result of Invisible Children's campaign is to cause millions of viewers to think Northern Uganda is a war zone, even if it's not their intent, it's hard to defend.
THANK YOU! Couldn't have said it better myself.
"rubber room" your ignorance is blatant
rubber room, while we are sure you mean well, your ignorance with assumption that the USA is some omnipotent super nation that should or could continue down its self-destructive path of perpetual foreign intervention, when we share much of the same oppression cited with Africa here in beautiful America, is downright frightening. Why is it, that is is those of us with no financial woes today, that have traveled every other continent in the world and well read that are the ones that see this?
do you have kids? If so, are you prepared to send your daughters over to Uganda or any other nation in Africa to provide "military intervention"? Or are you such the sexist hypocrite, you somehow think some other "child soldier" from the USA will do the dirty soul work for you? Are you aware that the USA has already wasted at least $36million on trying to "help" Ugandas military by providing "local military & training"? First of all, oppression cannot be stopped by more oppression...which "military intervention" entails, 2nd of all, the USA has its own unethical big bad army and military recruiters hunting down child soldiers here in USA....which by the way is at near default on its massive debt DUE DIRECTLY to our needless foreign intervention over past decade (you you naive enough to think 9/11 a flat out "sneak attack" from outside, and even if so, if after providing Israel with weapons for decades any outsider may have wanted to "defend their nation"? Before you speak any more, do your own research, read "The American Way of War" by Eugene Jarecki for one, or "Why we fight" documentary. If you still don't understand that we need to focus on stopping our own oppression within, ask the parents whose daughter was tracked down by military recruiters knocking down her off campus apartment while studying at Harvard Med School and who just got back from Afghanistan in a body bag. While it is no more sad these 18 year old girls are now being hunted down more than boys since the military realize they have discriminated the "equal opportunity act" (war is after all just a for-profit biz)...Is this what you want for the USA to continue to do? Half our country stands in poverty, we have the highest cancer rates among any developed nation, we are cutting budgets across our schools, closing schools both private and public, closing clinics and hospitals.....ALL to pay for needless wars/foreign intervention. Very un-American, and in fact, our bloated MIC goes against warnings of five of our founding fathers. Please research before opening your mouth again. Amen
You absolutely perfectly said what I was thinking as I read this article. I'd like to add, I read last night that 35 million people had already watched this video, most within the last week alone. IC did what no one else was able to do- they got Americans interested. Nobody cared about this a week ago, but now it's all over the place and that is a phenomenal achievement. I'm so glad these people cared and worked as hard as they did. Instead of sniping and nitpicking, I say let's thank IC for helping to bring energy and attention to the issue- and let's bring Kony to justice, for his victims and as a message.
may God have mercy on your soul
Dear Michael Wilkerson, i have made an overview of your arguments against Invisible Children, you say:
#1. (§6) Joseph Kony is not in Uganda
#2. (§6) LRA "only" numbers at most in the hundreds
#3. (§8) Invisible Children is trying to convince everyone that 30,000 mindless child soldiers are roaming the lands
#4. (§9 and §10) After stating that the army is so small, why bother doing something about Kony?
#5. (§13) "But in the new film, Invisible Children has made virtually no effort to inform"
#6. (§17) "There is intense criticism out there"
#7. (§17) "it spends too much money on administration and filmmaking"
#8. (§17) "it's never been externally audited. I'm going to stay out of that, other than to say you can check out IC's own financial disclosure information here."
#9. (§18) IC's goals are unclear
#10. (§19) IC has goals, but these goals are wrong
... look: I could go on, but to be honest, I am getting tired of reading your "me famous, too" essay, so let me answer these points:
#1,#2,#5,#9 are cleared by RLIV104 (http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/03/07/guest_post_joseph_kony_is_not_in_uganda_and_other_complicated_things#comment-998101)
Concerning:
#3: you're right, these 30 000 mindless soldiers dont exist. But noone ever said that.
#4: There exists this concept called "sense of justice." Before reading your post, i was convinced everyone had a sense of justice. And this sense of justice is hurt, and causes a person to want to take action to bring this man to a court.
#6. Smart of you to put a link there, makes it seem serious, especially since it links to a tl;dr article. But I actually read it, and instead of calling it " intense criticism" I would rather call it "a person who doesn't want to support IC (financially!) because he found a for him better-suited NGO (CISV International).
#7. Are you suggesting these people use this NGO as a profit-maschine? That's very low of you, especially since I haven't found any well-founded criticism on the internet concerning their finances.
#8. Any person, who actually clicked on that link to the financial report, like me, must admire the loving and caring way this report was made. If I was planning to donate, I would take IC into consideration.
Have a nice day!
Maarten
I applaud your outgoing criticism of this ridiculous article! It upsets me to know that people are attacking the only campaign that seems to be addressing this issue. Whether or not IC is perfect seems irrelevant: they are making waves and raising awareness for a crime that has gone unnoticed for 20 years.
Having followed the story of Kony and the LRA for several years now, I feel compelled to support some of Wilkerson’s key points. It is inspiring to see how many viewers of the film feel compelled to take action. But it’s important for critics of this post to think deeply about the complexity of international aid, funding, and military action.
Humanitarian aid organizations rely on two resources: donations, and the attention of an engaged public. Both are in finite supply. So, while it appear that the LRA currently requires immediate attention – and this not a given - there are in fact many other international issues that are even more pressing. For example, the opposition in Syria survives in part because of international assistance (much of it covert) and pressure applied to the regime, which only happens when a critical mass of the Western public demands it. Similarly, the decisions Iran makes now regarding its production of nuclear materials and weapons, and the concomitant decisions Israel makes about launching a military strike, are strongly affected by Western sanctions (read:public attention). I welcome a spotlight on the LRA, but this deflection of public opinion is poor timing in the development of the situations in Syria and Iran. So it makes a difference whether the Kony 2012 video depicts the LRA as a clear and present danger to Uganda or not.
Invisible Children commands the public’s attention because they have successfully marketed a powerful message about the LRA’s atrocities – something for which they should be commended. However, those atrocities are not occurring on the same scale. Public attention was critical in the 90s and 2000s, but there no longer exists an army of 30,000 kidnapped child soldiers in the jungles of Uganda. The LRA’s attacks have dropped precipitously. This would be irrelevant except for the fact that there still exists tremendous suffering in other international situations that urgently require attention and donations. If you really would like to support the effort against the LRA, then write to your congressman to support the implementation of the LRA Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act.
Finally, it’s worth noting that according to its financial records, I.C..’s percentage of revenue put towards salaries is within normal limits, but since 2006 it’s consistently put an average of about 20% of its expenses towards direct service even as its revenue has increased dramatically That means if you donate there, about 20 cents of every dollar actually helps to build a school in Northern Uganda. More might go towards making another movie, or transpo costs, or, sure, salaries. Those things are fine; people love their movie, and they have to get places, and they have to pay salaries. But, know where your money goes when you donate, especially to a small org that does not benefit from economies of scale.
First of all, most people who think that IC is doing a good thing, do NOT know what is going on in Uganda. Ugandan army did a lot of killings and the Uganda government put women and children in concetration camps where 1000 people died every week according to WHO. Museveni came to power using the same method as Kony abducting boys into his army and anyone can google "Museveni and child soldiers". IC did not even include the government's side and if a government can let its citizens be abducted and killed like that, then its not worth to its citizens. The video was made in 2003 and all the kids in the video are all grown ups and the young African boy is a 2nd year law student at Makerere. Uganda has a dictatorial government and Mr. Russell (IC) was working with Janet Meseveni (president's wife) and the IC was given full military escorts whenever they went to Uganda which is not accorded to other NGO in Uganda.
Need to educate yourself about the Government of Uganda.
First of all, most people who think that IC is doing a good thing, do NOT know what is going on in Uganda. Ugandan army did a lot of killings and the Uganda government put women and children in concetration camps where 1000 people died every week according to WHO. Museveni came to power using the same method as Kony abducting boys into his army and anyone can google "Museveni and child soldiers". IC did not even include the government's side and if a government can let its citizens be abducted and killed like that, then its not worth to its citizens. The video was made in 2003 and all the kids in the video are all grown ups and the young African boy is a 2nd year law student at Makerere. Uganda has a dictatorial government and Mr. Russell (IC) was working with Janet Meseveni (president's wife) and the IC was given full military escorts whenever they went to Uganda which is not accorded to other NGO in Uganda.
This is really well said. I've had a ton of conversations as of late with my coworkers at Karmaloop Rep Codes about this exactly. It is a fantastic marketing effort, and there is a lot of legitimacy to the campaign!
If you ever research about quantum physics and the power of intention you can perhaps understand the power that movements like this can have... We are talking about human minds caring about other people in another continent, no matter what the result is in this case, the video has achieved something by expanding young people minds and hearts... I don't really understand why the critics are so proud to be critical and turn people off, and on top of that their statements never finish with a positive option of what to do instead... I really hope that the amount of people that still believes is larger than the amount of PROUD critics!
Agreed. Author didn't watch film
I agree. It doesnt seem that this author has watched the film or done extensive research on Invisible Children.
There's still some reaction coming out in Uganda. This was in the papers today:
http://www.monitor.co.ug/artsculture/Reviews/-/691232/1365090/-/item/0/-/2ibo3q/-/index.html
It will help you understand the conflict better.
The author is Michael Wilkerson, first of all...
This article or "smear campaign" as you deem it to be was written by Michael Wilkerson as it so clearly states at the top of the article twice, a journalist who has lived and worked in the region. He's not an armchair critic. So right off the bat, your reactionary tone is off base and a perfect example of many of the people taken in by all this. If you're going to dissect someone's criticism at least know who you're talking to in the first place if you're going to accuse them of being snarky among other remarks.
Several prominent Ugandan authors/activists have responded with criticisms of Invisible Children's campaign and their less than direct helping use of funds donated to their group. Seek them out as people who would know better, who have lived there and experienced the effects of many things on their country, rather than just getting mad at Wilkerson for echoing some of their concerns. The implication is not "why bother?" it's that this Invisible Children campaign simply doesn't work because its stated approaches and listed expenditures of its funds are not worthy of the huge sums of money they are getting for essentially making a finely crafted piece of cinema and getting people to share a video that doesn't really facilitate this evil doer's capture or help the people there.
Invisible Children are raking in profits and making people feel like they're doing the right thing for participating. But buying a bracelet and giving money to Invsible Children is not helping the people of Uganda put their country back together or save children like it could. You watching a video and spreading it to your friends does nothing. It is a social media fad. A viral campaign of vengeance against one bad guy does not make the world a better place.. especially if the guy is already on the run from mulitple governments. 10 million views on youtube and fb status posts galore don't help those groups catch Kony. There is already maximum awareness of him in the region. Giving money to Invisible Children is not going to change that.
If you want to give money to help, give to a local organization that empowers its own people, the Ugandan people to their own full capacity, rather than a group of outsiders that spend a ton of money making movies and galvanizing kids online to buy bracelets so they can make more movies and do more bus tours and speeches to make more films and bracelets... and then potentionally fund a Ugandan regime that has its own humanitarian "issues" with no guarantee that money is even going to be put towards this cause. And again, if you don't like what Michael Wilkerson not any "Mr. Keating" has to say as a journalist with experience in the area (not to mention other journalists with expertise in this) then read up on the actual Ugandan critical voices of this whole PR charade.
What does Invisible Children do with the charitable contributions it receives besides pay its founders?
To the Defensive and Guilt Ridden
I agree with this commenter. Those who've attacked the commenter, and attack Invisible Children: Admit it. The Kony video works. It's imperfect but it works incredbly well. It's raising awareness, sparking debates --like this one -- and has triggered efforts on the ground that have a much higher chance for success today than before the video caught on. There's never been a success in "do-gooder" history that wasn't followed by attacks, from people who either have, after years of work, failed to measure up to such success, or who have never lifted a finger and need to trash those who do to cope with their own guilt, or their own denial of their own guilt.
The thing I pray for most is patience with ignorance.
: "I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
-Ditto Sir
I completely agree with this point. if i can help 1 child with 30 dollars i will gladly do it, even if jason, whatever his white ass name is, "steals" most of it. i read that they organization has not been audited so how do we even know how much money is going to the cause? we can't prove that its 100 percent, but we also cant prove that he is just taking everyone's donations and doing nothing for this cause. kony should be stopped, captured and convicted.no matter where he is or was or might be. no matter if he is actually less powerfull than he used to be. the over simplification thing is intended to get the attention of today's youth, who can't bother reading somehthing longer than a facebook post. just cause it's simple doesnt mean it isnt noble. but in the end, youre right... maybe this isn't the best organization to support, but at least i know about joseph kony now and i hope that people will research legitimate organizations to help those children. even if it's just buy buying things or clicking a mouse to donate... it's better than shrugging your shoulders and doing nothing. or worse! trying to reverse the good intentions by offering your "critique".
I completely agree with this point. if i can help 1 child with 30 dollars i will gladly do it, even if jason, whatever his white ass name is, "steals" most of it. i read that they organization has not been audited so how do we even know how much money is going to the cause? we can't prove that its 100 percent, but we also cant prove that he is just taking everyone's donations and doing nothing for this cause. kony should be stopped, captured and convicted.no matter where he is or was or might be. no matter if he is actually less powerfull than he used to be. the over simplification thing is intended to get the attention of today's youth, who can't bother reading somehthing longer than a facebook post. just cause it's simple doesnt mean it isnt noble. but in the end, youre right... maybe this isn't the best organization to support, but at least i know about joseph kony now and i hope that people will research legitimate organizations to help those children. even if it's just buy buying things or clicking a mouse to donate... it's better than shrugging your shoulders and doing nothing. or worse! trying to reverse the good intentions by offering your "critique".
More info on Operation Observant Compass and the LRA
For people who might have become recently interested in Uganda, the LRA, and what the US and regional actors are doing about them, I recommend this as a starting place: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/observant-compass.htm
@RLIV104 this wasn't a post by Josh Keating. Your hyperbolic assumptions about Michael Wilkerson's post are warranted to some extent, but I see, for example, no overarching dismissal of Uganda's problems, rather I see deep concern for holistic and long-term growth. Also, in all my research of IC I have heard very little specificity besides "build some schools" as to their long term development plans - Wilkerson's appraisal of their operation as rather vague is, I think, accurate. Overall, I clearly just read the post differently than you, and you do bring up some excellent rebuttals - it is your total dismissal of Wilkerson's broader themes, which are backed up by a deep trove of development literature and research dealing with nonprofits like IC, and for that matter any NGO, that I take issue with. The risks Wilkerson points out are real and dangerous. I might add, I'm glad to see this discussed.
It astounds me that the overarching and oft-repeated mission of IC seems to be lost on so many.
They are NOT trying to change the long-term prospects of Uganda or Africa as that is the work of many well-established and well-funded major NGOs worldwide.
The very specific goal is to increase awareness among the people of the world to the evil bastard that is Joseph Kony and in doing so ratchet up international pressure to arrest and bring him to justice.
How this point gets by so many otherwise intelligent and erudite people is beyond my comprehension.
Military intervention by U.S. would be stupid and anti-American
So "knowledge is power".....just what nation do you expect to come to aid of this grossly exaggerated "problem"???? Hmmmm? If you say it's Obama's problem.....think otherwise and stop being so selfish and misinformed. The USA is not able to continue providing this meddling everywhere in international affairs (especially since biggest reason we have is to provide corrupt money into military coffers at expense of the American people). The USA is at near default on its massive debt DUE DIRECTLY to its horrific wars/foreign intervention over past decade......is this how you or "Invisible Children" see as a way to "stop Kony".....by more oppressive war/foreign "intervention" which by the way practices act not too unlike Kony.....chasing down innocent kids in America of all socioeconomic statuses across private/public schools to "fight for their country" as the marketing spin goes? Are you unaware or negative enough to realize that we are cutting budgets across more beneficial things to our own nation and turning the USA into 3rd world status due to this? (rank last in healthcare out of any developed nation slightly above 3rd world Cuba, among highest rates of cancer, parents asked to bring in basic supplies to schools) while we spend multi-trillions on useless fighter jets and bombs? what exactly are you suggesting here?
"Also, apparently it's never been externally audited"
erm, the very first accounts i clicked on 2006 - has a cover letter from the auditor.
Thats some damn fine journalism there Michael - linking a document that contradicts your statement...within the statement. Mind. Blown.
Hi Leon,
You're absolutely right. Charity Navigator rates IC 2/4 stars on transparency and accountability because the auditor was not overseen by an "external audit committee", eg someone to check the auditor's work who is not also paying the bills. Also because there are apparently not enough voting board members. Sorry about that. http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=12429 and http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=1093.
You'll notice that I use the word "apparently" again, because I'm not an expert on NGO finance, and because it's not critical to my larger point that calling to action millions who now erroneously think the LRA is in Northern Uganda is problematic. I linked to ICs own documents precisely because I didn't want to make any definitive claims on the financial front but rather acknowledge the critique and let others examine them. Damn fine job doing so.
Cheers,
Michael
So who pays the external auditors? And who audits those auditors? The coast guard?!
While it might be a bit off the main topic of how the suggestion of the LRA in northern Uganda is counter productive it's probably basic journalism to establish what is fact and what's not.
Apparently someone said something that they were apparently told by someone else so I won't take any responsibility if it's wrong.
Damn fine way to boost your website though - criticizing a viral video. Damn fine.
@RLIV104 You took the words right out of my mouth. Could not have agreed with you more.
Russell decides to do something that he believes is right and all someone can do is bash his campaign....like really??....come ON. Russell is obviously doing a hell of a lot more than whoever it is that wrote this contradictory post.
@Chris.Mawhorter - My apologies to Mr. Keating on the misattribution. I wish this comment feature had an edit function.
I absolutely agree that Uganda (and, for that matter, other African nations) are in need of more than the arrest of one heinous criminal and "some schools." I actually have no problem with thoughtful criticism of IC - but that's not what Wilkerson did here. He first accused Jason Russell of preying on the emotions of his audience, which is unfair when his explicitly stated goal was to get viewers to connect on a human level with the horrible atrocities that occurred in Uganda and other nations. He then accused IC - very unfairly - of failing to provide information that was in fact included in the Kony2012 video. When he does acknowledge that the aforementioned information was provided, he complains that it is oversimplified (which should be expected given the format) or confusing on the basis that twitterverse screwed up the hashtags. Finally, he offers the race/class criticism I described above, which in my opinion was gross and undignified.
Where you see you see Wilkerson's allusions to the complexities of the Ugandan situation as a "deep concern for holistic and long-term development," I see a missed opportunity. If not IC - where would Mr. Wilkerson like his readers to direct their energy? He certainly does not offer any constructive alternative on this score. Rather, he seems to imply that the development situation is so complex that no proactive assistance can possibly be offered from the well-meaning but ignorant hordes who were moved by the IC video. Additionally, while the removal of tyrants, dictators and other powerful thuggish actors from positions of power always causes some disruption, Mr. Wilkerson questions the benefit of bringing a internationally-indicted criminal to justice. By that logic, why even have an ICC? Dealing with war criminals is just so damn inconvenient. I'm all for holistic solutions, but I'm certainly anti-handwringing and anti-capitulating, which is the tone that Mr. Wilkerson took in this piece.
If Mr. Wilkerson - or any other critics - want to take issue with the IC video, they would do well to provide objective criticisms rather than character attacks against Jason Russell. They would also do well to offer alternative engagement models for the audience the IC film is targeting rather than complaining that a propaganda film designed for social media isn't nuanced enough. In other words; lead, follow, or get out of the way.
Well said. I'm sick of the "wringing hands" deal, as well. So many problems in this world, but if we never start, nothing will ever change. And THAT'S what the "bad guys" count on - complacency... What perturbs me the most: I saw this link on facebook. Just what the world needs, someone to dampen the spirit of those who would like to see/help things change. Someone to tell them: It's too big. You can't do it. Goodness, I hope we prove him wrong.
Only people who take action truly care...
I'm not entirely sure raising awareness, if that's what tweeting and facebookery amounts to, counts as action against the LRA, but I sincerely hope it does have a positive effect somehow. I know people are genuinely appalled by the images they see in the video, and it's good to know people care enough to want to do something.
Many of those who are expressing frustrations with articles such as this do so in a constructive way, and I understand where they are coming from. But to those who keep saying criticism is unsupportive: please stop.
Please stop telling people that if they raise concerns over a suggested solution to a problem, they are being unhelpful.
What would some people prefer? That instead of thinking seriously and carefully about actions and the situations in which they are applied, we just plunge head-first into them and hope for the best? Based on what? That our intentions are good and at least it's better than doing nothing?
Maybe it's not better than doing nothing. Military interventions can, and often have, impacted very negatively in Africa. In Uganda, in fact. And NGOs, for all their good intentions, can also impact negatively when trying to make a positive input. So that's why criticisms are important, and shouldn't be dismissed so disdainfully.
In any case, it's important to point out that this isn't a choice between doing something, and being pro-human rights and having a soul, or doing nothing and being a spineless soulless negative armchair critic.
It's possible for someone to say 'we should do something, but this probably isn't it, and here's why I think that', and to still care just as much as you do about the cause. Maybe more so if they've been concerned about these issues for closer to 24 years than 24 hours. Generally I think it's less important how much people care than how useful their proposals/criticisms are.
It is not campaign-bashing for someone to point out what concerns them about a campaign. I would call that campaign-assessing. Using personal judgement to decide if the campaign will be effective, to work out if extra awareness and funds would have the impact that is being sought.
Articles like the one above are useful because they are written by individuals with first-hand knowledge of Uganda's issues. People who have spent more time than most thinking about them. They are not just based on quick summaries of blogs, news articles and youtube videos, which have a habit of repeating inaccurate information until those inaccuracies become fact through ubiquity alone. This article should also be criticised and considered, sure, but the way this turns into 'you're either a humanitarian or you're a campaign-basher', it's hard to feel that the debate is helpful.
Indeed, there is so much misinformation bouncing around the internet echo chamber that the truth seems to get stepped on at every opportunity. Specifically. you seem to have absorbed some in your comment in repeating the critical meme that IC is calling for US "military intervention" in Uganda/Africa.
IC very clearly did no such thing in the video I watched. What they very specifically explain there (and for those who seemingly did not pay attention, in a later written response) is that the operation should be lead by Ugandan forces for specific reasons, but that the US provide its technical and tracking resources to find Kony in an area roughly the size of S Carolina.
It is not marginalizing Africans to say that they do not share the resources of the US Army or Navy SEALs in this regard. Likewise, the criticism of the Ugandan forces alleged rape and other illegal practices is held up as a reason not to track down Kony. This is false reasoning at its best. Don't use the US military, and using Ugandans is hypocritical because they are dirty too - result? No one tracks down an obscenity walking the earth.
None of us objecting to the myriad presumptions, inaccuracies and erroneous implications in Mr Wilkerson's piece have said that ALL criticism is unhelpful. It just helps if the criticism is based in fact and not fictions.
Campaign assessing is not campaign bashing
very well written Mittonk.....may I add that perhaps we should show the few misinformed souls so quickly shouting "Let's Save the African Children" and somehow relating this to "Saving the World" a comparative video of the child soldiers from USA being asked to "fight for their country" as the marketing spin goes, coming back with legs blown off, in body bags, mentally ill......these are young 18 year old girls and no less horrific boys being approached in high schools and universities across the nation. We can say they "volunteered" their "services" as the heart wrenching and soul sick saying goes....yet the only reason these girls and boys "volunteer" to be put into harms way for no other reason than war profiteering corporations/contracters is because they are told they would be helping to "protect America's freedoms and national security" from all those overly fabricated "terrrorist" out there. It's an $800 billion extremist regime, embroiled into every cornerstone of America, and represents an oppression bordering on line of becoming as bad as any 3rd world nation out there....The USA is becoming a militarized High Hitler style police state, corrupt cops throwing grenades into innocent crowds...yet we still have a few people in the dark about the whole thing. Let's show those videos to create "awareness", and because we have sexist idiots that think my gender (female) somehow deserve to be protected from this horrific harm any more than males be sure to show plenty of pictures of young girls with torsos blown off and called "Patriotic". We can have them crying like Jacob in this video "all I ever wanted in life was to be a doctor and save lives or be a Victoria Secrets model". what's really sad, there are people that would read my post and think me "sick" or having weird thoughts.....but truth is this is what is happening across America....I've seen firsthand my friends daughter come back from attending Harvard Med school in body bag. And no less sad people's sons......for what? 9/11 was NOT a reason for this even if a "sneak attack" as the false statement goes, all evidence pointing to some obvious internal plotting to fuel war profits...it was an excuse. Now, after spending multi-trillions on this useless "miltary intervention", the USA stands near complete default on it's massive debt, $ 635billion wasted on what marketing spin calls "homeland security" since 9/11, while we cut budgets across all the American peoples freedoms and real security. Even if this video does not blatently call out for more "military intervention" by our innocent girl and boy child soldiers.....every bit of research material out there says this is one of this total spam of a campaign is asking for. I would not be surprised if the Pentagon is not somehow behind this rediculous "good cause"
As someone who has gone through the civil war in El Salvador and can now see the long term effects of this, I think that the kony2012 campaign is a reflection of our relieving our white burden with fragmented notions which lack responsibility and a coherent framework. Sad really. Celebrity driven event charities rarely do much good, other than making ourselves feel good for five seconds.
I write a bit about it in my blog :
http://wingeyes.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/i-dont-believe-in-charity/
If you have nothing nice to say...
Though I have little faith in the intellectual capacity of the masses (Americans in particular), I believe people could process and understand the clear diagram and (if brief) blurb regarding Kony's movement out of Uganda. Despite any inaccuracies, glazings over, or general misrepresentations made by the makers of this video, the important thing that I take away from the rapid-fire spread of their message is that people who normally would not are taking notice of something far more important than anything going on within their relatively small and privileged world. If the millions of mindless Kim Kardashian fans, Nicki Minaj stans, and Jersey Shore wannabees are made aware of the responsibilities of being a global citizen, maybe they will take a step away from a small-minded existence and into an education. If not on this issue, then potentially child labor in China or the growing income inequality right here in the States. A lot to ask, I'm aware - color me a pessimistic idealist.
To reach a large audience, given our technology-warped attention spans, one has to give a surface-scraping interpretation of an issue in hopes to reel in as many interested parties as possible. From there, as 'MITTONK' says, those truly impassioned will dig deeper and hopefully take action. If you take such issue with the way they are attracting people to a cause, join the movement and educate those involved on what you feel the country/region actually needs. Quickly, while you've got their ears.
Anti-American bigotry isn't acceptable
You write:
"Nicki Minaj stans"
Perhaps you should take stock of your own intellectual capacity (and ability to spell) before you deign to criticize, in broad strokes, Americans. Perhaps you should take a look in the mirror to see one of the small-minded people you think you stand apart from so hypocritically.
Anti-American bigotry isn't acceptable, and for God's sake buy yourself a dictionary or at least learn how to use spell check on the computer you're using (that was invented by "stupid" Americans, you know).
thank you... you just put it the right way.. i cannot understand how someone can raise his voice against something that makes the carless finally look up and care
A "stan" is a colloquial hip hop term for a mindlessly devoted fan. It's "ironic" that a commenter named "Wyclif" would not know this.
Thanks for the response. Also, just want to say that the opening of the post almost make it look like the "Hitler" tweet was what Wilkerson wrote, I was confused at first as well.
I think that the article was on the whole a little more benign than you argue, but I do think you bring up an important point with the "who besides IC" issue. From what I know about development in Uganda (relatively little compared to other places) it is actually to some degree a success story in terms of countries benefiting from globalization, economic development strategies, etc. (this is in no way intended to take any stance on globalization) I agree with your point that mr. Wilkerson may have done better to redirect people's passions, but I also must agree with @mittonk that IC, while able to create good looking media and stir up a lot of passion, is not the ideal platform for comprehensive development strategies to take place - though they could become that. I take issue with IC's approach which often comes off to me as a glossy campaign to stir up compassion fatigue, rather than look comprehensively at a situation.
Having a friend who was an IC roadie and having seen numerous videos, I'm glad for the work IC has done in the narrow field it has chosen, and these kind of campaigns are vital for continued public support of these types of issues. I simply think their perspective is too narrow. In fact the "who but IC" comment shows a sort of sentiment which one of the IC guys (not sure of the name, but I don't think Russell) himself said in a Wash Post piece I just read, in brief: we can't trust policy makers to solve these issues. In that case, what good is the ICC? The growing sentiment that bloggers and tweeters need to take up arms to raise a ton of money (always portrayed as "here's something easy you can do" such a lie in the development line of work) and circumvent the government, or "wake up" the officials is frankly an affront the the thousands of brilliant, dedicated development professionals who work excruciatingly hard every day to find comprehensive solutions to these very issues. "Who but IC?" Let's try UNDP, WorldVision, or if we want to get smaller I am sure that there are no-name NGOs operating on tiny budgets getting amazing things done in Uganda. I have never heard IC reference these kind of people (I haven't watched/read everything so I'd love to be proved wrong). This kind of work takes a lot more than t-shirts, celebrities, and bracelets (even though I think the merch IC puts out is fantastically good looking and their fund-raising model is something that could get applied a lot more, and indeed already has).
I don't really think that people who tweet or blog or buy a shirt are callous or just trendy compassionists - they do care - but I do think that the whole attitude of "screw the institution, we're doing this grassroots" creates a lot of entropy and makes talented, dedicated professional people have to jump through a lot more hoops than they need to, not to mention lose all sorts of funding. If we need solutions, let's get some young idealistic people into government and development who can take the innovative action that needs to happen to the street (not that the government/NGO/IGO establishment isn't already innovative, I think they are). There is a fantastic article by Richard Holbrooke in the book recently published on him in which he looks at the post-Vietnam mentality which spurned government because of its perceived failings. He calls for a return to government service, and for government to reform itself as well to make the state (and this can be applied to NGOs and IGOs now too) the dynamic institution it once was.
All in all, I think IC is treading in some rather dangerous waters now. It once was effective and relevant and is striving to maintain this effectiveness for good reasons. Their message is still crucial. However, their allergy to specificity and holistic strategies - essentially to get into the nitty-gritty of a long-term solution to east and central African problems and dig in for the long haul - worries me. They like the "here's something easy" approach too much. Also, their allergy to cooperation with other NGOs and groups like UNDP frightens me as well (in their videos they always look like the only folks on the ground, they may even say that a couple of times). I think that they need to broaden their approach and get away from the superficial blogosphere activism that makes development sound "easy as the click of a mouse." Ultimately they also need a gut check on what their exit strategy is post Kony (close down or redirect) and make sure that they are not trying to self-perpetuate when they would do best to leave the scene - a well documented conflict of interest for NGOs anywhere (not saying that needs to happen now). Part of the mastery of doing development is knowing when to quietly walk off stage. In the end, its got to be about Ugandans solving Ugandan problems over decades, not 140 characters from San Diego.
Also, @mittonk, fantastic points. I think that the good natured activism spawned by IC type operations has a tendency toward this sort of sentiment. In the end, getting an advanced technical or social science degree (Econ, polysci, development, or engineering, medical, etc.) and hitting the field is what's going to make a difference, and help to really understand the gut wrenching emotions surrounding the bigger picture in Uganda, or anywhere else.
Any serious inquiries should mail me for further definate instructions. Terminal intent is a must. just leave a e mail and easy I.d.
a must read for all real liberals
http://blogs.jpost.com/content/dangerous-alliance-faux-liberals-and-islamists
Invisible Children's Official Response to Criticisms
If you are interested, here is Invisible Children's official response to the criticisms it has been receiving.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/www.invisiblechildren.com/critiques.html
I just feel like I need to say "Welcome to the party, Captain Obvious"...
You act as if you've just revealed this drastic discovery - "Kony - not actually in Uganda!"
This is completely old news. Those of us that already gave a **** years ago already know this information. And if you're meaning for the general public watching the video that it's some breaking news to them - it's not. It's mentioned that he fled. And by the way - IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE HE IS!
Justice is owed to UGANDA. Justice is owed to the 30,000... and NO! We don't care if that is not the number he CURRENTLY has in his power. Also not breaking news, or crucial information.
Justice is owed to the 30,000 and to Uganda. And to the other areas he has traumatized - - - over time!
Just as when the US was hit - evil was not HERE.... it was elsewhere. And we were willing to track it down wherever he was (location does not matter)... but justice was due to America, so it was an AMERICAN issue.
And honestly I don't care how they use my money. If it goes to the films, or to the paycheck for the people leading the films - great! Because those films have done more to raise awareness and create a generation of activists and caring young people than anything else. There is an IC chapter at just about every High School and College around America. To see teens actually have this genuine compassion and concern for others, and awareness for their global community, and the urge to fight against injustice done to others even if not to them.... That's what this guy did for this generation. When I was their age, all I cared about was social politics. I had no idea what happened outside of my school or my town or even my state, let alone my country. That alone is worth a LOT.
What did you do for this generation? Anything? Besides criticizing it?
The problem is still there. The evil is still there. The hard basics are still the core truths of the matter.
Your attempts to be enlightening merely look like a foolish bully throwing rocks at a soldier - who fights because it is the right thing to do. Regardless of where the fight has moved to, or the fact that progress has already been made in order to lighten the casualties of that war. If the criminal remains, the fight will remain.
And if kids continue to give a damn - - - then Amen to that!
Why would you try to trip up anyone that attempts to make progress?
I can't agree with you anymore, people are too focused on how money is spent and not on the message and what they are trying to achieve. Simply sending money to the people in Uganda or anywhere else in Africa doesn't solve the problem, it is just a band-aid that doesn't solve the core issues. Send money to help where you can but spreading advocacy in countries around the world and bringing awareness and promoting bringing justice to war criminals like Kony is still money well spent instead of turning a blind eye and thinking throwing some money will fix it.
Not only that but there promotions in America are well directed, as you stated these advocacy groups span the world in schools and teaches kids to be active and understand you can be apart of the solution. Now if IC were using it's money to buy the head honchos million dollar houses and expensive cars than i would agree with anyone who had an issue with the organization, but since they clearly are not and only pay the top executives a reasonable salary to live off of ill donate a few bucks and cheer them on for trying and hoping to make the world a better place, because god knows we need it.
And on a side note I don't think people understand how much lobbying costs, to keep the "mentors" (or whatever they call them) in Uganda to keep tracking Kony, IC has to do everything they can to prove to the US government that this is a serious topic that isn't just the focus of an organization, but the focus of the people of the US.
Invisible Children's Brilliant Pro-War Propaganda
Invisible Children's Pro-AFRICOM and Museveni Propaganda
Invisible Children's goals initially may have been to publicize the plight of children caught in Uganda's decades-long conflicts; lately, IC has been acting as apologists for General Yoweri K. Museveni's dictatorship and the U.S. goal to impose AFRICOM (the U.S. Africa Military Command) on Africa.
IC has produced a brilliant film that's making the global rounds on facebook.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc
It's a classic as propaganda pieces come. The short but overwhelmingly powerful film uses all the best tear-jerk techniques. In the end, the film denounces Joseph Kony, the leader of the brutal Lord's Resistance Army, while giving the impression that Museveni's dictatorship and his brutal military, which was found liable for war crimes in Democratic Republic of Congo by
the International Court of Justice, has nothing to do with the atrocities committed against children in Uganda. It also doesn't inform viewers that Museveni abducted thousands of child soldiers to win his insurgency in Uganda in 1986, launching the pattern of child soldier recruitment all over Africa. In fact, Kony's insurgency against Museveni was launched later,
meaning he too learned child soldier abductions from Museveni.
Look at the way Invisible Children exploits American children in the beginning of their documentary; they then transplant the audience to Uganda, where again they take advantage of Ugandan children, who are the victims of both the LRA and the Ugandan government's army.
The imagery are powerful. Dr. Joseph Goebbels' and Leni Riefenstahl would have been proud of this cinemantic coup by Invisible Children.
If Invisible Children was in fact a serious organization that has not been co-opted by the Museveni regime and the U.S. foreign policy agenda, the organization would inform the world that General Museveni, who has now stolen three elections in a row in Uganda is the first person who deserves to be arrested. This Ugandan and East African nightmare gets a blank check from Washington simply because he has deployed Ugandan soldiers to Somalia at the behest of the United States. So democracy, human rights abuses, genocide, become minor nuisances as far as U.S. foreign policy goes and as far as Invisible Children cares. This is beyond hypocrisy. Those members of Invisible Children who may have supported this misguided
project to send more U.S. troops to Africa because they were unwittingly misguided, should so some serious soul searching.
Museveni does not care for the plight of children in Uganda's Acholi region. How else would he have herded 2 million Acholis in concentration camps for 20 years where, according to the United Nations' World Health Organization (WHO), more than 1,000 children, women and men died of planned neglect--lack of medical facilities; lack of adequate food; dehydration, and; lack
of sanitation and toilet facilities. Does this sound like a person who cares about children?
His colleagues have denounced Acholis as "backwards" and as "bilogical substances." General Museveni himself revealed an interesting pathology, as a first class racist African when he told Atlantic Monthly Magazine, in September 1994: “I have never blamed the whites for colonizing Africa: I have never blamed these whites for taking slaves. If you are stupid, you
should be taken a slave.” Ironically --or perhaps not-- the general was even more embraced by Washington after those remarks.
Gen. Museveni has been a U.S. ally since the days of Ronald Reagan.
So why does Invisible Children only go after Kony while leaving Museveni alone when in fact they are two sides of the same coin?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1TL6T-sv4U
These young folks who run Invisible Children are extremely dangerous to the welfare of Ugandans and other Africans should they succeed in broadening U.S. military presence in Africa. If the United States were truly interested purely in eliminating Kony why deploy now when Kony abandoned Uganda in 2006 when he was negotiating a peace deal that ultimately
collapsed, with Museveni. While Kony and his fighters were camped at Garamba in Congo, as agreed upon during peace negotiations, who was it that launched a military attack with planes and helicopters in December 2008? It was Gen. Museveni, with U.S. assistance. The peace
negotiations, which had been embraced by traditional and religious leaders in Acholi region, collapsed. Immediately more killings ensued --this time in Congo; and since Museveni and Kony are two sides of the same coin, it's unclear who committed the atrocities in Garamba after the abortive attack.
After the attacks the LRA scattered into the Central African Republic. One would imagine that if the U.S. and Invisible Children were really interested in Kony, the deployment would have been to Central African Republic.
The young folks behind Invisible Children don't understand the conflict in Uganda; yet they have made themselves the spokespersons. It's like a group of impressionable young White youngsters coming to Harlem and saying: we see you have major crises, let us tell you what's the solution. Who would accept such misguided and destructive arrogance? If it's unacceptable
in Harlem, it must also be rejected in Uganda's Acholi region.
Acholi traditional leaders, religious leaders, and members of Parliament in Uganda, have all opposed further militarization. But they are not in a position to express their views on CNN or in The New York Times, or to make a slick documentary, such as Invisible Children's. What's more, they're not accorded the presumptive credibility that are often bestowed to White analysts when compared to native Ugandans.
Yet, rather than listening to the cries of Ugandans who live in the war-devastated regions, Invisible Children has decided to produce a beautiful documentary with an ugly agenda that only escalates conflict and endorses
Gen. Museveni. Who really believes it's a good thing for the United States to be sending troops to Uganda or anywhere in Africa? Why would these troops act any differently than those sent to Iraq and Afghanistan?
The U.S. government and Invisible Children are using the brutal Joseph Kony as a bogeyman to justify the U.S. long-term plan, which is to impose AFRICOM on Africa. Since everyone knows about Kony's atrocities, who would object if the U.S. sends 100 U.S. "advisors" to help
Uganda, after all? Brilliantly devious. Of course it never stops as 100 "advisors." That was the announced deployment; there are probably more U.S. troops in the region. Even before the deployment some had already been training Museveni's soldiers. And more will come; unannounced.
AFRICOM, the ultimate objective, would allow the U.S. to be able to counter resource-hungry China by having boots on the ground near the oil-rich northern part of Uganda, South Sudan, Congo's region bordering Lake Albert, and Central African Republic. The troops would also be near by in case a decision is made to support regime-change in Khartoum, Sudan. After all, the U.S. foreign policy reasoning is that since Sudan's president Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his defense minister have both been indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), few would shed tears for them.
The U.S. is aware that African countries oppose AFRICOM. So what does the U.S. do? Go after a "devil" and in this case it's Kony. Tell the world --with the help of Invisible Children--that our mission is to help rid Uganda of this "devil"; who by the way is hiding somewhere in Central African Republic, while the dictator who most recently stole elections last February,
sits in Kampala and meets with U.S. officials and leaders of Invisible Children.
If the real target was simply Joseph Kony, the U.S. would have used an armed predator drone; this is how the U.S. says it has eliminated several suspected leaders of Al-qaeda and the Taleban, after all.
It doesn't seem that Invisible Children is an independent do-good save-the-children outfit. They are paving the way --with Kony, brutal as he is, as the bogeyman-- for AFRICOM.
Kony is a nightmare, but Museveni has caused the deaths of millions of people in Rwanda, Uganda and Congo. In 2005 the International Court of Justice found Uganda liable for what amounts to war crimes in Congo: mass rapes of both women and men; disemboweling pregnant women; burning people inside their homes alive; massacres; plunder of resources. Congo lost six million people after Uganda's occupation of parts of Congo. The Court awarded Congo $10 billion in reparations; not a dime has been paid.
Congo then referred the same crimes to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague for war crimes charges. On June 8, 2006, The Wall Street Journal reported that Gen. Museveni personally contacted Kofi Annan, then UN Secretary General and asked him to block the criminal investigation.
http://www.friendsforpeaceinafrica.org/index.phpoption=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=110
It seems that the U.S. and ICC Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo might have indeed obliged. Museveni remains un-indicted; only one side of the same coin, Kony was indicted. Prosecutor Ocampo is also discredited; readers should Google "Ocampo and South African journalist."
There is another documentary that tries to explain the Ugandan tragedy, in a more sober manner, unlike Invisible Children's slick propaganda piece.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09I-GRBf3Cw&feature=related
Hopefully this commentary will motivate people to do their research and demand that the international community deal with both Kony and Museveni.
Hopefully more people will also do their own research and not be vulnerable to slick propaganda such as Invisible Children's.
For example, Google terms such as "Yoweri Museveni and Congo genocide," "Museveni and Kony," "Museveni and and Rwanda genocide," "Museveni and Acholi genocide," and "U.S. support for dictator Museveni."
I would suggest all those people who are suddenly passionate about the capture of Joseph Kony to think twice about how easy they can be manipulate.
We are not informed by our media. We are manipulated.
And the result is that kind of frenetic behaviour when a group of people know how to pull the string of citizen's emotions for the economic interest of the US and its domination over the rest of the world.
If really, people, you want to start change something in this world, then start in your own neighborhood.
Start in your own country.
I bet than less than 1 mile (km for european) from you, from where you are standing right now, there's someone suffering from injustice, poverty.
Now you can actually really start to change the world.
Or is it too close ?............
We don't want to dominate you...
We just want your money... or oil... or cheap labor...
Thank you for exposing Museveni and his crimes.
At least Michael Wilkerson and FP will trend now with IC.....All i get from this post is that you lived and reported in Uganda, and did nothing but WATCH.
Now you are mad cause you are not trending. Maybe you feel you did something besides just report the bad news. Maybe you feel you are owed something for your time spent their watching. Well if you lived there then you would join the movement and stop doing NOTHING but watch.
This is your chance to do something besides OBSERVE and REPORT!
Join the KONY 2012!
After KONY we can hit that huge list of ICC's bad guys, Change the world finally perhaps. When all is said and done what will you say you did? I watched it happened and did nothing but try to shoot holes in the people that are doing things. Or, stop watching and do SOMETHING about it.
It was a well written and very observant post.
That's a bit of an unfair statement deriding journalism as just watching and doing nothing. There are journalists who go to the front lines and face sometimes even life-endangering risks to discover what's actually happening in the world. Some of them even die for their efforts, for example, NY Times writer Anthony Shadid. Without journalists, we wouldn't know people's stories and/or some people wouldn't have a voice.
Furthermore, FP is not trying to hinder helping the people of Uganda. Rather they are offering to clarify the picture of what's happening that IC has shown the world in their films. This post is essentially raising the questions: is arresting Kony the best solution to ending the problems in Uganda? what is truly the best way to help the people of Uganda? Both parties are noble in their actions. Because both are pointing people toward a positive direction.
How many people commenting on this post are Ugandan? I am not Ugandan but I have lived here and reported from here for 2 1/2 years. MIchael has spent a lot of time in Uganda and understands the country and knows many people in politics, journalism and the NGO world. Truth is almost 100 percent of the Ugandans reacting to the IC campaign and #KONY2012 on Twitter?Facebook et al. are against such a campaign and are incensed at its inaccuracies and its "please white people, only you can save these poor Africans" insinuations. Kony has not been found because he is hiding in a remote, vast and ungoverned region under the cover of rainforest. Neither IC nor a hashtag will change this nor other facts on the ground.
I am sure Michael consulted his people on the ground in Uganda before writing this post. I think all of you who are criticizing him to do the same.
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
May/June 2013
-
Profile
-
FP Power Map
-
Think Again
Follow us on Twitter | Visit us on Facebook | Follow us on RSS | Subscribe to Foreign Policy
About FP | Meet the Staff | Foreign Editions | Reprint Permissions | Advertising | Writers’ Guidelines | Press Room | Work at FP
Services:Subscription Services | Academic Program | FP Archive | Reprint Permissions | FP Reports and Merchandise | Special Reports | Buy Back Issues
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Contact Us
11 DUPONT CIRCLE NW, SUITE 600 | WASHINGTON, DC 20036 | Phone: 202-728-7300 | Fax: 202-728-7342
FOREIGN POLICY is published by the FP Group, a division of The Washington Post Company
All contents ©2013 The Foreign Policy Group, LLC. All rights reserved.
(199)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE