Is It Still Worth It?

Institute for Peace and Security Studies Addis Ababa University Course: Peace and Sustainable Development in the Horn of Africa

Helen Deffner M.A. Global Studies 10/12/2017

“Is It Still Worth It?” – An Analysis of Support for the Ugandam Refugee Policy Regime

Structure I.

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1

II.

Corruption in Aid Work ................................................................................................................... 2

III. The Ugandan Refugee Policy Regime .............................................................................................. 3 A. Foundation and Structure ..................................................................................................... 3 B. Aid for Uganda´s Refugee System ........................................................................................ 4 IV. Is it still worth it? ............................................................................................................................. 5 A. Corruption ............................................................................................................................ 5 B. Other Factors ....................................................................................................................... 6 C. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 6 D.

Bibliography..................................................................................................................................... 7

I.

Introduction

Migration in the Horn of Africa has long been acknowledged as a significant policy matter, particularly following the effects of climate change and ongoing civil wars. Refugee camps in Ethiopia, Kenya, Sudan, the DRC and CAR are constantly experiencing influx, nowadays specifically of South Sudanese refugees fleeing the civil war in their home state. The country that is most affected by incoming refugees, however, is only adjacent to the Horn: Uganda has already accepted one million South Sudanese war refugees thus war and is known to have one of the most open and integrative refugee policies across the globe. (Betts, Bloom et al. 2016) In 2016, no other country took in more migrants than the small central-African state, and refugees receive work permits, land, the guarantee of freedom of movement and access to public services such as health and education. (Titz, Feck 2017) Additional to the altruistic aspect of Uganda´s refugee policy, particularly the northwestern part of the 1



country is experiencing continuous development through international aid pouring (with 40 registered aid organizations). There are, however, several critiques of this system, most importantly the countless claims that significant portions of the aid money that is flowing into Uganda – much of it specifically to support its asylum law regime – have been corrupted and misused.

A number of questions thus arise: why is Uganda´s refugee policy so progressive, who wins and who loses in its equation and, most importantly, is it still worth it? – still worth it to create money flows into a system that enables refugees to live in security, autonomously and with relative freedom while high percentages of the money given to provide exactly this is knowingly disappearing into private pockets. Put differently, what´s more important, “the country's noble intentions or the selfish calculations of the governing clique in Kampala?” (Titz, Feck 2017)

This paper will analyze the Ugandan refugee policy regime and particularly the corruption of aid money.

II.

Corruption in Aid Work

Many countries in the world depend on foreign aid in various forms. These can include bilateral aid from high-income to low-income countries, multilateral aid from international organizations, grants, loans, technical assistance, etc., based on the understanding that the programs serve not only to reduce poverty, but to reward good policies, good governance (including low levels of corruption) and efficient governments. (Alesina, Weder 2002: 3) The sum of this official development aid amounts to about $130 billion a year of which more than two-fifth flow through multilateral outfits such as the World Bank, the UN and the Global Fund. (The Economist 2016) Often, however, financial assistance doesn´t reach those in need in the low-income country but instead is “wasted in inefficient public consumption”. (ibid) Aid can also burden weak bureaucracies, prop up dictators, help prolong civil wars and distort markets (The Economist 2016); and, more importantly, is constantly used as a foreign policy tool (as can be seen in the recent examples of aid agreements between the European Union and several autocratic African regimes). Even states that are known to be crippled by a corrupt system often receive aid from states that hope to advance their foreign policy aims.

2



In the well-known and widespread debate about corruption undermining development1 most argue that foreign aid even fosters corruption by increasing the size of resources fought over by interest groups and factions (Lane, Tornell 1996, 1999, Transparency International 2016, et al.), and that corruption robs people of their essential resources. Another argument is that aid agencies must move fast in emergency humanitarian situations and therefore often bypass standard anti-corruption measures. (Transparency International 2017) Others make the point that aid organizations themselves waste money on hunting down fraud instead of using it to aid people in need, and that because measures of corruption tend to suggest poor countries to be more corrupt, the world´s poorest countries and people don´t get as much aid. (Kenny 2017)

An African country that has seen its aid money frozen due to high levels of corruption in the state apparatus is Uganda which receives most of its aid as a reward for its open refugee policy regime.

III.

The Ugandan Refugee Policy Regime

Currently, Uganda is hosting the third-largest number of refugees by providing a home for 1,25 million refugees. (UN News Centre 2017) The number of refugees from South Sudan especially has exceeded expectations in 2017 with a total of approx. 898,000, of which only 300,000 had been projected to arrive. (UNHCR 2017a: 56) Especially over the last few years, the influx of refugees into the country is the fastest-growing worldwide, with 1800 South Sudanese refugees a day. (UNHCR 2017b)

A. Foundation and Structure Uganda´s refugee policy regime is based on the sol-called “Self-Reliance Strategy”2 : while in most countries refugees remain dependent on humanitarian assistance or the welfare system, those arriving in Ugandan refugee camps are granted a plot of land, access to public services such as health and education services, freedom of movement and the permit to work. The government´s argument for this policy is that refugees are thus able to become productive members of their community and can contribute to the overall development and poverty alleviations of host districts. (UNHCR 2003)

1

(…), as corruption itself is one of the “chief drivers of instability and facilitators of mass migration” (Transparency International 2016) (…) 2 See UNHCR (Development Assistance for Refugees (DAR) for Uganda Self Reliance Strategy, 2003), as well as National Legislative Bodies (Uganda -The Refugee Act 2006).

3



This unique refugee policy is the result of traditions throughout different cultural groups, most importantly the Kakwa living across the borders drawn by the British colonial powers in the 19th century. The northern region of Uganda has in fact always been shaped by cross-border traffic and exchange, and local people have historically not understood the cross-border migration as a burden or extraordinary occurrence. (Titz, Feck 2017) This view is also animated from above: the Ugandan Minister for Migration, Musa Ecweru, explained in an interview that refugees are the victims of a failing international system of peacekeeping, and Uganda will always keep its borders open because of their self-understanding as Pan-Africanists.

The state´s ability to offer refugee families land in the northern regions – in designated areas called “settlements” (see Kigozi 2017) – is based on the fact that these parts of the country are characterized by structural underdevelopment and poverty while also being scarcely populated. (Schiltz, Titeca 2017) The unprecedented influx of the last years has put intense pressure on Uganda´s natural resources, particularly on land, basic service delivery systems and the response capacity of humanitarian and development actors. (UNHCR 2017a: 56) Local communities are additionally growing continuously impatient with the increasing influx of refugees (with some districts trying to stop the relocation of refugees onto their land), and there are several known cases of locals disguising as refugees to access the provided aid. (Schiltz, Titeca 2017) Ecweru states that to enact its refugee policy regime the government is in need of (financial) help from the international community. (Ecweru, with Schlindwein, 2017) Yet even the aid money and humanitarian assistance that Uganda has been granted by the international community have not led to drastic changes.

B. Aid for Uganda´s Refugee System Aid for Uganda has been frozen several times, most drastically in 2012 when $12.7 million in donor funds had been embezzled from Uganda´s Office of the Prime Minister (OPM). While significant parts of Uganda´s national budget are made up of foreign aid ($1.2 billion in 2015 which made up 39%; DI 2017), large percentages of it had been intended to rebuild the northern regions after the 20-year war, to better access to fundamental services and thus having a direct impact on human rights. (Ford, Tran 2012; Human Rights Watch 2013)3

3

It is, however, not easily distinguishable which purposes the aid money is supposed to serve in detail and which amounts flow into refugee-related projects. In order to analyze the influence of aid money used for these, this paper is the numbers the UNHCR has been giving and is currently asking for from donors.

4



Mid-2017, UNHCR had a budget of $551,051,801 for Uganda, with $416,332,152 intended for “refugee programs”. (UNHCR 2017d) Yet it did not only appeal to the international community to support its coalition with the World Food Program (WFP) and 57 other humanitarian agencies with $1.4 billion for their South Sudanese refugee response plan (UNHCR 2017c), but also hosted a Solidarity Summit with the Ugandan government in the hope of raising support through investments, projects and development programs that amount to $2 billion. The Summit did, however, only raised $358 million. (ECRE 2017)

This funding shortfall has, according to UNHCR, impacted “the abilities to deliver life-saving aid and key basic services”, (UNHCR 2017b) and shows that the granted access to land and public services is not enough but that money from aid organizations is urgently needed to provide efficient care for all refugees.

When discussing the system of international support for Uganda – and specifically its refugee policy regime – it is important to analyze the given structures. The country has been ruled by Yoweri Museveni since 1986 and can only be described as a “hybrid” democratic regime with semiauthoritarian tendencies. Its strong culture of impunity results in no political accountability. Having a successfully promoted refugee policy regime can enable elites to deflect attention from this.

IV.

Is it still worth it?

A. Corruption The corruption of aid money flowing into Uganda is difficult to catch in numbers. During the 2012 scandal, numbers were published (as seen above), yet since then the corruption of incoming aid money has not been transparent. (see e.g. Afrobarometer 2016) Interestingly – or perhaps exactly because of this lacking transparency – institutions often frame Uganda as the most refugee-friendly country and argue its system has solemnly been drained by droughts and overpopulation, but ignore the corruption claims. (e.g. ECRE 2017) Others, first and foremost Transparency International, “strongly believe there [are] enough [resources] for the needs of every Ugandan but not enough for the greed of public servants entrusted to manage resources responsibly for the good of all Ugandans” and that corruption conduct must be stopped to ensure “meaningful development for all Ugandans.” (Transparency International 2012)

5



Overall, corruption does pose the biggest threat to the continuation of Uganda´s refugee migratory policy. It is “severe, well-known, cuts across many sectors, and (…) frequently debated and discussed in the media” (Human Rights Watch 2017). This directly affects human rights because it cannot be ensured that institutions will protect against violations of human rights or deliver justice. (ibid) Recommendations therefore include increasing responsibility, the re-evaluation of anti-corruption legislation and its effectiveness, more stringent clauses by donor communities and more direct funding to civil society, as well as accountability. (Transparency International 2012)

B. Other Factors Yet there are other important arguments to mention in regard to the Ugandan refugee policy regime: Firstly, Uganda is presented in major news outlets and throughout the public discourse as one of the most refugee-friendly nations worldwide, which can be argued to enable Western governments to push forward the externalization of their migration regimes. (see Schiltz, Titeca 2017; Deffner 2017). It also allows Western countries struggling with migration policy for refugees from African states to show that African countries themselves are able to host refugees and migrating towards Europe can thus be described as “unnecessary”.4

There are also several known critique points to the refugee system itself: much research on the issue focus on economic performance of few (and mainly in the southern regions), ignoring that the majority of refugees live at subsistence level (with over 70 percent depending on the World Food Program, Patton 2016) and with little long-term future prospects (the question of land right and citizenship are yet to be resolved, Kigozi 2017).

C. Conclusion The answer to the question whether supporting the Ugandan refugee policy system is still worth it can of course not readily be answered. But pulling support by decreasing the aid flows is the solution that will affect the vulnerable the most: not only corrupt elites, but first and foremost refugees in dire need of support and solidarity will suffer from such cuts. It is therefore time for affluent countries to not only continue aid payments (while ensuring anti-corruption measures) but also to increase resettlement places as well as safe and legal routes for South Sudanese refugees. (Amnesty International 2017) After all, the open and inclusive environment for refugees in Uganda should not

4

This argument, however, can easily be dismantled because not only Western governments, but mainly the media is pushing this view on the Ugandan system – without having a direct policy aim.

6



be allowed to stagnate because it does offer a model for refugee management in Africa and all over the globe.

D. Bibliography Afrobarometer (2016): Fighting Corruption in Uganda. Dispatch No. 77, 28/03/2016. Online: http://afrobarometer.org/sites/default/files/publications/Dispatches/ab_r6_dispatchno77_uganda_c orruption.pdf, last retrieved 10/12/2017. Alesina, Alberto; Beatrice Weder (2002): Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid? In: American Economic Review, 92(4), p. 1126-1137. Online: https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/4553011/alesina_corruptgovernments.pdf, last retrieved 03/12/2017. Amnesty International (2017): Eight Things You Need To Know About Refugees In Uganda. 19/06/2017. Online: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/06/8-things-you-need-toknow-about-refugees-in-uganda/, last retrieved 10/12/2017. Betts, Alexander; Bloom, Luise; et al. (2016): Refugee Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Deffner, Helen (2017): Whose Security Is It? A Securitization Analysis of Current European and African Migratory Cooperation. Institute for Peace and Security Studies, Addis Ababa. Online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321713565_Whose_Security_Is_It_A_Securitization_Anal ysis_Of_Current_European_and_Africa_Migratory_Cooperation, last retrieved 10/12/2017. Development Initiatives /DI (2017): Global Picture: Uganda. Online: http://data.devinit.org/country/uganda, last retrieved 10/12/2017. The Economist (2016): Misplaced Charity. In: The Economist, 11/06/2017. Online: https://www.economist.com/news/international/21700323-development-aid-best-spent-poor-wellgoverned-countries-isnt-where-it, last retrieved 05/12/2017. European Council on Refugees and Exiles (2017): Uganda: Solidarity Summit on Refugees 2017. 30/06/2017. Online: https://www.ecre.org/uganda-solidarity-summit-on-refugees-2017/, last retrieved 05/12/2017. Ecweru, Musa (2017): “Our Borders Stay Open”. Interview with Schlindwein, Simone for taz.de, 21/06/2017. Online: http://www.taz.de/!5424032/, last retrieved 03/12.2017. Ford, Liz; Tran, Mark (2012): UK suspends aid to Uganda as concern grows over misuse of funds. In: The Guardian, 16/11/2017. Online: https://www.theguardian.com/globaldevelopment/2012/nov/16/uk-suspends-aid-uganda-misuse, last retrieved 04/12/2017. Gardner, Tom (2017): Beneath the surface of Uganda's 'exemplary' refugee settlement, tensions simmer. In: Reuters, 15/11/2017. Online: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-uganda-refugees7



landrights/beneath-the-surface-of-ugandas-exemplary-refugee-settlement-tensions-simmeridUSKBN13A1UW, last retrieved 05/12/2017. Human Rights Watch (2013): “Letting the Big Fish Swim”. Failures to Prosecute High-Level Corruption in Uganda. 21/10/2017. Online: https://www.hrw.org/report/2013/10/21/letting-big-fishswim/failures-prosecute-high-level-corruption-uganda, last retrieved 04/12/2017. Kenny, Charles (2017): How Much Aid is Really Lost to Corruption? In: Center for Global Development, 23/01/2017. Online: https://www.cgdev.org/blog/how-much-aid-really-lostcorruption, last retrieved 03/12/2017. Kigozi, David (2017): The Reality Behind Uganda´s Refugee Model. In: News Deeply, 30/05/2017. Online: https://newsdeeply.com/refugees/community/2017/05/30/the-reality-behind-ugandasglowing-reputation, last retrieved 04/12/2017. Lane, Philip; Tornel, Aaron (1996): Power Growth and the Voracity Effect. In: Journal of Economic Growth, p. 213-41.

National Legislative Bodies Uganda (2006): The Refugee Act. 24/05/2006. Online: http://www.refworld.org/docid/4b7baba52.html, last retrieved 04/12/2017. Patton, Anna (2016): Is Uganda the best place to be a refugee? In: The Guardian, 20/08/2017. Online: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/aug/20/is-ugandathe-best-place-to-be-a-refugee, last retrieved 04/12/2017. Ravelo, Jenny Lei (2012): 30 percent of aid lost to corruption – Ban Ki-moon. In: Devex, 10/07/2012. Online: https://www.devex.com/news/30-percent-of-aid-lost-to-corruption-ban-ki-moon-78643, last retrieved 03/12/2017. Schiltz, Julie; Titeca, Kristof (2017): Is Uganda really a ‘refugee paradise’? In: Al Jazeera, 29/07/2017. Online: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/07/uganda-refugee-paradise170726133024156.html, last retrieved 04/12/2017. UN News Centre (2017): Africa's largest refugee crisis now a 'children's crisis' – UNICEF. 20/06/2017. Online: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=57014#.WiaE1HkxnIU, last retrieved 05/12/2017. UNHCR: (2003) Development Assistance for Refugees (DAR) for Uganda Self Reliance Strategy. Report on Mission to Uganda 14th to 20th September 2003. Online: http://www.unhcr.org/41c6a19b4.pdf, last retrieved 04/12/2017. (2017a) South Sudan Situation 2017. Supplementary Appeal. Online: http://www.unhcr.org/593e9e9b7.pdf, last retrieved 04/12/2017.

8



(2017b) South Sudanese refugees in Uganda now exceed 1 million. 17/08/2017. Online: http://www.unhcr.org/news/stories/2017/8/59915f604/south-sudanese-refugees-ugandaexceed-1-million.html, last retrieved 03/12/2017. (2017c) Over US$1.4 billion needed for South Sudan refugees in 2017. 15/05/2017. Online: http://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2017/5/591966294/us14-billion-needed-south-sudanrefugees-2017.html, last retrieved 05/12/2017. (2017d) UNHCR Global Appeal 2018-2019. Online: http://www.unhcr.org/afr/publications/fundraising/5a0bfe697/unhcr-global-appeal-20182019-africa.html?query=uganda, last retrieved 05/12/2017. Titz, Christoph; Feck, Maria (2017): Uganda Is the Most Refugee-Friendly Country in the World. In: Spiegel Online, 13/09/2017. Online: http://www.spiegel.de/international/tomorrow/uganda-is-themost-refugee-friendly-country-in-the-world-a-1167294.html, last retrieved 03/12/2017. Transparency International: (2012): Aid Robbed In Uganda – What Can Be Done? 23/11/2012. Online: https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/aid_robbed_in_uganda_what_can_be_done, last retrieved 05/12/2017. (2016) The Refugee Crisis: Why We Need To Speak About Corruption. 04/03/2017. Online: https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/the_refugee_crisis_why_we_need_to_speak_a bout_corruption, last retrieved 05/12/2017. (2017): Humanitarian Assistance. Online: https://www.transparency.org/topic/detail/humanitarian_assistance, last retrieved 03/12/2017.

9