Migingo Island Dispute May Threaten East African Integration
blurb:isstoday:120309migingo
12 March 2009: Migingo Island Dispute May Threaten East African Integration
Tensions are high on Migingo Island in Lake Victoria following a standoff between Ugandan and Kenyan security forces in recent weeks. The presence of Ugandan authorities is increasing on the island, and there are currently no Kenyan security officials stationed there. Kenyan fishermen have had to bare the brunt of the dispute, and many of them feel neglected by their government, as they have not seen any concerted effort to resolve the issue. Some of the Kenyan fishermen have begun to leave Migingo, seeing that they are being systematically chased out of the island, and seemingly with no assistance from their government. The main question to ask is what does this all mean for East African integration, which is an ideal that is espoused by all the East African Community (EAC) governments. In addition, the use of inappropriate strategies to address the problem could have served to excarbate tensions.
As one of its aims, the EAC envisages a political federation of the East African states by 2012. However, the acrimonious relations currently prevailing regarding Lake Victoria and its islands do not bode well for the future of this ambitious aim. As a Regional Economic Community (REC), the EAC is expected to establish cross-border cooperation to strengthen overall regional cooperation. One would imagine that integration efforts of this nature would be gradual and would be initiated on a small scale. The several islands sprinkled across Lake Victoria are the ideal place where integration efforts could be initiated. The equitable sharing of the Lake’s waters could be used as a test for harmonious integration in the region.
Most significant, however, is the manner in which the boundary dispute has been handled by Kenyan and Ugandan authorities. There has been an apparent application of inappropriate remedies to address the problem. Furthermore, there appears to be a lack of urgency, and a sense that negotiators are content with the slow pace at which things are progressing. Meanwhile the blame game intensifies.
The dominant response to the dispute has by far been the use of armed forces. From the time the dispute erupted in 2008, there has been a consistent deployment of armed forces by both countries, particularly Uganda. The latter has also used a combination of heavy-handed tactics to threaten Kenyan fishermen on the island. This has heightened tensions between the two countries and has not helped to resolve the conflict. This approach has neglected to consider the people most affected, the fishermen. This is certainly not the way to go about resolving the dispute. The main problem is the issue of ill-defined or undemarcated boundaries, meaning it is an essentially technical problem, and therefore requires a technical solution. Kenyan Prime Minister, Raila Odinga announced in January that Kenya had convened a technical team and that its findings pointed that the island belongs to Kenya. He further noted that a Ugandan team was expected to work jointly with the Kenyan team. Further details regarding the proposed joint commission have not been forthcoming.
A joint Kenyan and Ugandan technical committee should have been the initial response. The committee’s main aim should have been to analyse the existing colonial treatise establishing the Kenya-Uganda boundary. The initial boundary was established by an Anglo-German agreement of 1914; however, the present boundary is based on a British Order in Council of 1926.
According to the International Boundary Study, the overall Kenya-Uganda boundary extends for approximately 580 miles (933 kilometers), and the Lake Victoria segment is approximately 86 miles (138 kilometers). The study determines the precise coordinates establishing the boundary. Most significantly, the study has the exact coordinates of the boundary on Lake Victoria. On the lake, the Kenya-Uganda boundary is delimited from 1º south latitude, through the lake to the Mouth of the Sio River. This sector begins in Lake Victoria, at the Tanzania tripoint, which is located on the first parallel south and approximately 33 º 56´ east longitude. A joint technical team has to analyse the available coordinates and prepare for proper demarcation using visible pillars, as has been suggested before.
It will be difficult and costly to demarcate the boundary on the lake. But this is necessary in order to ease tensions and to maintain cordial relations between the two neighbours. The major difficulty will stem from the problematic nature of ecological boundaries, as they are inherently dynamic. To ensure a lasting peace, it is also necessary to tone down the political rhetoric, establish an all-inclusive joint committee to solve the dispute and take into account the fishermen who depend on the lake for their livelihood.
The belligerent attitude demonstrated by the authorities which has come to characterise the dispute, poses a serious threat to integration efforts that the region strives for. The manner in which the dispute is handled and ultimately resolved will serve as an indication for the future of East African integration. The leaders will do well by threading carefully on this issue, a precedent could be set for dealing with border disputes in the region, and the leaders would be advised to exercise a judicious approach.
Namhla Matshanda is conducting research on African borders within the African Security Analysis Programme, ISS Tshwane (Pretoria)
