Kony 2012 Could Serve as a Wake-up Call
The controversial video about the LRA’s Joseph Kony, Kony 2012 represents a successful utilisation of soft power and public diplomacy that may force Ugandan policymakers to react positively to the groundswell of interest in and scrutiny of Uganda
Sandra Adong Oder, Senior Researcher, Conflict Management and Peacebuilding Division, ISS Pretoria
Love it or hate it, the use of social media to promote the immensely
popular Kony 2012 video, has
stimulated a global conversation that requires that we sift through some
unpleasant truths. The video, posted on YouTube on 5 March has since gone viral
on the Internet with over 100 million viewers. It is narrated by one of the
founders of an organisation called Invisible Children, Jason Russell, and has
drawn the support of celebrities including George Clooney and Angelina Jolie.
Meanwhile it has provoked criticism for oversimplifying the conflict involving the
Lord Resistance Army’s (LRAs) notorious leader Joseph by, for example, not
making it clear that Kony was driven out of Uganda as far back as in August
2005. While such campaigns use cutting-edge technology that may expand our
ability to harness these new platforms for conflict management and
peacebuilding, it is worth noting that solutions to related problems, while
illuminated by social media, do not depend on it. Simply knowing about Joseph
Kony and the atrocities he and his followers have committed is therefore not a
basis upon which to act and may at best inspire only the motive to act.
This year marks the 50th anniversary of Uganda’s independence
on 9 October 1962 and is a crucial time for reflection in the life of a country
that has gone through some tough times since 1962. During this time, a major
source of conflict in northern Uganda ended when Kony left the country.
Although he is no longer in Uganda, the country is still not yet free from the
LRA threat, mainly from a post-conflict reconstruction and development
perspective, and has had to craft domestic and foreign policies to deal with
such threats.
Kony 2012 has now put
Uganda back on the map and it can be argued that this focus may not lend itself
to critical scrutiny if we do not question the role of social media in altering
or shaping the conduct of conflict resolution, as well as in shaping domestic
policies. Successive evolutions in social communication have changed the
meaning of power in international relations, especially in North Africa, where
the level of actors participating in political processes, either by default or
otherwise, is now at that of individuals. Governments have lost much of their
monopoly on power, and non-state actors and individuals have become much more
active and significant participants in world affairs, primarily by using
‘smart’ or ‘soft power’. For the first time in history, people are now
connected globally across borders and social media have brought about changes
in the world that 20 years ago would have been impossible to imagine.
Significantly, Kony 2012
represents a successful utilisation of soft power and public diplomacy that may
force Ugandan policymakers to react positively to the groundswell of interest
in and scrutiny of Uganda. The video campaign inadvertently encourages
Ugandans, particularly those who have watched it, to reflect on the state of
the country today, almost 50 years after independence. What started out as a
virtual discussion may have repercussions for the country’s policymaking
imperatives. Several factors come to mind, however, when attempting to
understand the role of social media in conflict management.
Firstly,
although it is contentious, unfortunately the debate around the relevance and
context of Kony 2012 has been
disappointing and risks degenerating into trivial sloganeering. Given the lack
of any definitive solution to the problem of Kony and the LRA, Kony 2012 arguably presents a new
approach to highlighting a situation where all concerned parties have become
jaded, ambivalent and wary because of the lack of solutions. It is quite
misleading to frame the issue as a choice between whether or not Invisible
Children has the right to propose its solution to the LRA debacle, or a
discussion of who gives it the mandate to do so, to the detriment of other
local initiatives.
One can only
hope that Kony 2012 will serve to
reawaken nationalism among Ugandans that may result in policymakers taking
steps to placate regional sentiment across northern Uganda. This is because
some of the issues raised in the video are far from frivolous and may strike an
emotional and responsive chord in the hearts of many Ugandans and exploit
deep-seated popular resentments held by northern Ugandans in particular, who
suffered from a brutal war from 1987 to 2006. This reservoir of deeply held sentiments
may reappear if some of the old wounds from the brutal war are not dealt with.
For even after the departure of Kony and the LRA, today northern Uganda still
has its fair share of tensions in the form of land disputes, and service
delivery and reintegration challenges, and more significantly, it has to deal
with the psychological consequences of violent conflict. The video may lead
Ugandans to ask why resources are spent on foreign policy imperatives – Somalia
and the recent African Union LRA initiative come to mind here – in a region
where urgent internal matters need to be addressed.
Secondly,
social media such as Kony 2012 stimulates
a ‘problem consciousness’. It only helps us to be aware of our strengths and
limitations, arguably enabling us to reflect, but little more. While some of
the issues presented by social media are spontaneous, there is need to be aware
that such media, including Kony 2012,
are not simply explicable in terms of prior, rational deliberations that are
taken forward, but, rather, are informed by a wide set of issues, including our
social contexts, history and experience. Notwithstanding this, social media in
particular as it relates to reporting on conflict issues, which is naturally an
emotive topic, should be open to scrutiny. Without this, social media can
easily reflect the prejudices of the authors/creators, where such positions can
perpetuate discriminatory practices.
In spite of
critics’ best efforts to undermine Kony
2012, we need to acknowledge that we cannot control the use to which its
contents can be put. Significantly, it is important to be aware of the issues
surrounding the production of Kony 2012.
Who funded it and why? What was the rationale for the video campaign and what
are the consequences of such media? Asking such questions enables us to
understand the context in which such products are made. It also enables us to
counter the design and production of the video as simply a technical matter,
uncontaminated by outside influences.
Still, what is
missing in the debate is an understanding that the status of social media and its
role in managing conflict is probably transitional, and may well be something
different next year or in the coming decades. It would therefore be fruitless
to search for a politically correct posture to embrace the role that social
media plays in this area. The role it plays in conflict management is still in
its preliminary stages and any expected results may only be present more
through a process of trial and error than by design. No overriding principle or
notion of political correctness will be sufficient to handle the burgeoning
nature of social media and what it can do to shape the conflict resolution
landscape.
Social media has
come to stay, and we have to deal with the consequences. There are limits to
counteracting Kony 2012, for we must
acknowledge that we should not simply acquiesce, nor does it relieve us from
the responsibility to ask what our own role has been in managing conflict and
building peace in northern Uganda. What does Kony 2012 do to us at an individual level? What call to action is
evident? As Uganda prepares to celebrate 50 years of independence, Kony 2012 may have inadvertently
provided a platform for the asking of difficult questions.
Looking back at
Uganda’s last 50 years and in the face of political, social and economic
challenges, it has been resilient and has withstood these reasonably well. Nonetheless,
with the current global focus on and scrutiny of Uganda, social media such as Kony 2012 may have inadvertently
revitalised internal discussion by ordinary Ugandans on important matters that
impact on domestic politics.