Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.

Final Project

671 vues

Publié le

  • I can advise you this service - ⇒ www.HelpWriting.net ⇐ Bought essay here. No problem.
       Répondre 
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • If we are speaking about saving time and money this site ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ is going to be the best option!! I personally used lots of times and remain highly satisfied.
       Répondre 
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • The "Magical" Science Behind The Law of Attraction  https://bit.ly/30Ju5r6
       Répondre 
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici
  • The Surprising Reason 11:11 Keeps Popping-Up: Free report reveals the Universe's secret "Sign Posts" that point the way to success, wealth and happiness. Claim your copy right now! ■■■ http://scamcb.com/manifmagic/pdf
       Répondre 
    Voulez-vous vraiment ?  Oui  Non
    Votre message apparaîtra ici

Final Project

  1. 1. BILATERAL DIPLOMACY AND MIGINGO ISLAND TRANS BOUNDARY CONFLICT MANAGEMENT VINCENT OWUOR OOKO BID/0064/11 A Research Project Report submitted in partial Fulfillment for the Requirement of an Award of a Bachelor’s Degree in Disaster Management and International Diplomacy of Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology JUNE, 2015
  2. 2. ii Declaration This research project report is my original work prepared with no other than the indicated sources, support, and has not been presented elsewhere for a degree or any other award. NAME: REG.NO: SIGNATURE VINCENT OWUOR OOKO BID/0064/11 ………………… CERTIFICATION The undersigned certify that he has read and hereby recommend for acceptance of Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology a research project entitled: “Bilateral Diplomacy and Migingo Island Trans Boundary Conflict Management”. Signature:…………………………………….. Date:…………………………………….. Prof. Okoth, P.G. Department of Peace and Conflict Studies Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology
  3. 3. iii Dedication I dedicate this research project to the residents of Migingo Island who have persevered and are coping with the present conditions of conflict between the two nation states over the disputed Migingo Island. There hopes for a secure and peaceful working environment will ever be real.
  4. 4. iv Acknowledgement I would like to thank Almighty God for the good health and sound mind during the drafting and coming up of this research project. This acknowledgment would be incomplete without recognizing and appreciating the support from CDMAH through the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies for timely approval of our research topic. In addition, my deepest appreciation goes to Proff. Okoth, our supervisor, and Ms. Kimokoti for their exemplary mentoring and guidance they demonstrated to me, in as much as research work is concerned. Lastly, I wish to thank my family and friends for the emotional, moral and financial support they demonstrated to me. Thanks to all for your comments and advices.
  5. 5. v Abstract Migingo Trans Boundary Island has been at the centre of conflict for the past one decade now. Fishermen and traders have been at the receiving end since the conflict that is threatening relationship between Kenya and Uganda arose. This research, “Bilateral Diplomacy and Migingo Island Trans Boundary Conflict Management”, aimed at finding diplomatic solutions to the problem that is seen to be far from over. The objectives of this study were to identify the causes of conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island, examine the diplomatic options used so far in managing Migingo island boundary dispute and evaluate effectiveness of diplomatic options in resolving Migingo Trans-boundary conflict. This research project highlighted the significance of conducting such study, and justification of the study. Literature on the research topic was reviewed based on the general and specific objectives to identify the gaps and come up with the conceptual model. The research utilized mixed research methodology in collecting both the qualitative and quantitative data. A descriptive survey design was used to obtain information about residents of Migingo. Purposive sampling and random sampling techniques were used to identify the fishermen, traders and the BMU officials, forming a sample size of 40 .Data collection instruments were questionnaires, while secondary data was obtained through content analysis by reading current literature on Migingo island trans boundary conflict . Data obtained was analyzed and presented by use of charts and graphs in accordance with the objectives. The study revealed that major cause of conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island was scarce resources in Migingo. The resources being fought for included; fish, water, and land found around the Island. Most of the respondents mentioned negotiation and dialogue as the most used diplomatic options in managing the conflict. Almost half of the respondents stated that the two employed diplomatic options were not successful and other options like mediation be encouraged. Summary of the key findings, conclusion and recommendations were made in line with the specific objectives. Suggestions for further research on this area were also made. Documents and references materials used were acknowledged and evidences such as questionnaire and maps attached as appendices at the end of this study.
  6. 6. vi Table of Contents Declaration......................................................................................................................................ii Dedication......................................................................................................................................iii Acknowledgement .........................................................................................................................iv Abstract...........................................................................................................................................v Table of Contents ..........................................................................................................................vi List of Figures................................................................................................................................xi List of Tables ................................................................................................................................xii Abbreviations and Acronyms .................................................................................................... xiii Operational Definition of Key Terms .......................................................................................xiv CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background to the Study........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem.......................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Objectives.................................................................................................................................. 6 1.3.1 General objective ................................................................................................................... 6 1.3.2 Specific Objectives ................................................................................................................ 7 1.4 Research Questions................................................................................................................... 7 1.5 Justification of the Study .......................................................................................................... 7 1.6 Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................... 9 1.7 Limitations of the Study............................................................................................................ 9 CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 10 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 10 2.1 The Causes of Conflict over Migingo Island .......................................................................... 10 2.1.1 Conflict Types and Causes................................................................................................... 10
  7. 7. vii 2.1.2 Conflict inherent in Migingo Island..................................................................................... 11 2.2Diplomatic Options Employed in Resolving the Migingo Island Trans Boundary conflict.... 12 2.3 Other Possible Diplomatic Options in Addressing the Conflict ............................................. 15 2.4 Gaps in Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 18 2.5 Theoretical Framework........................................................................................................... 18 2.5 The Conceptual Model............................................................................................................ 24 CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................... 25 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS ................................................................................. 25 3.1 Research Design...................................................................................................................... 25 3.2. Study Area.............................................................................................................................. 25 3.3 The Target Population............................................................................................................. 27 3.4 Sample Size............................................................................................................................. 27 3.5. Data Collection Instruments .................................................................................................. 28 3.5 Validity and Reliability of the Research Instruments ............................................................. 29 3.6.1 Validity................................................................................................................................. 29 3.6.2 Reliability............................................................................................................................. 29 3.6 Data Analysis and procedure .................................................................................................. 29 3.7 Ethical Considerations ............................................................................................................ 30 CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................... 31 CAUSES OF CONFLICT IN MIGINGO ISLAND ................................................................ 31 4.1 Response Rate......................................................................................................................... 31 4.2 Demographic Data of the Respondents................................................................................... 32 4.2.1 Nationality of the Respondents............................................................................................ 33 4.2.1 Age Bracket of the Respondents.......................................................................................... 34 4.2.3 Gender.................................................................................................................................. 35
  8. 8. viii 4.3 The Causes of the Conflict in Migingo Trans Boundary Island ............................................. 36 4.3.1 Resources ............................................................................................................................. 37 4.3.2 Territorial integrity claim..................................................................................................... 38 4.3.3 Regional rivalry and Economic Level ................................................................................. 38 4.3.4 Political interests.................................................................................................................. 39 4.4 Summary................................................................................................................................. 40 CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................ 41 DIPLOMATIC OPTIONS EMPLOYED IN RESOLVING THE MIGINGO ISLAND TRANS BOUNDARY CONFLICT........................................................................................... 41 5.1 Diplomatic Options Employed ............................................................................................... 41 5.2 Dialogue.................................................................................................................................. 43 5.2.1 Kampala Bilateral talks........................................................................................................ 43 5.2.2 Kisumu Technical Officers’ meeting................................................................................... 44 5.3 Negotiation............................................................................................................................. 44 5.3.1 Bilateral Ministerial meeting over the launch of border survey in Migingo Island............. 44 5.4 Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 45 5.4.1 The Joint Survey between Kenya and Uganda Experts ....................................................... 45 5.5 Summary................................................................................................................................. 46 CHAPTER SIX ........................................................................................................................... 47 EFFECTIVENESS OF DIPLOMATIC OPTIONS IN RESOLVING THE MIGINGO ISLAND CONFLICT ................................................................................................................. 47 6.1 Effectiveness of Diplomatic Options ...................................................................................... 47 6.2 Evidences of Successes........................................................................................................... 49 6.2.1 The Nature of Relationship among the Respondents in Migingo. ....................................... 49 6.2.2 The Kenyan-Uganda border in Lake Victoria...................................................................... 51 6.3 The Diplomatic Options Available to Resolve the Migingo Island Trans Boundary Dispute 53
  9. 9. ix 6.3.1 Continuous use of Negotiations ........................................................................................... 55 6.3.2 Applying Mediation and Arbitration ................................................................................... 55 6.4 Summary................................................................................................................................. 56 CHAPTER SEVEN..................................................................................................................... 57 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 57 7.1 Summary of the Study Findings ............................................................................................. 57 7.1.1 Research Objective One....................................................................................................... 57 7.1.2 Research Objective Two ...................................................................................................... 58 7.1.3 Research Objective Three .................................................................................................... 60 7.2 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 60 7.2.1 Objective One ...................................................................................................................... 60 7.2.2Objective Two....................................................................................................................... 61 7.2.3 Objective Three.................................................................................................................... 61 7.3Recommendations.................................................................................................................... 62 7.3.1Recommendation to Address Objective One ........................................................................ 62 7.3.2 Recommendation to Address Objective Two ...................................................................... 62 7.3.3 Recommendation to Address Objective Three .................................................................... 62 7.3.4 General recommendation..................................................................................................... 63 7.4 Suggestions for Further Research ........................................................................................... 63 References.................................................................................................................................... 64
  10. 10. x APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 68 APPENDIX I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION .......................................................................... 68 Appendix II:QUESTIONNAIRE FOR RESIDENTS IN MIGINGO ISLAND ........................... 69 Appendix III.................................................................................................................................. 72 Map of East Africa .................................................................................................................... 72
  11. 11. xi List of Figures Figure 2.1: Conceptual model showing relationship among the variables ................................... 24 Figure 3.1: Study Area with Modifications …………………………………………………….26 Figure 4.1: Pie Chart Showing the Nationality of the Respondents…………………………….33 Figure 4.2: Bar Graph Depicting The Gender Of The Respondents............................................. 35 Figure 5.1: Diplomatic Options Employed ................................................................................... 42 Figure 6.1: The Level of Success of the Diplomatic Options Employed ..................................... 48 Figure 6.2: The Location of Migingo Island by satellite image……….………….…….……….52 Figure 6.3: The Diplomatic Options and the Conflict They Resolved………………………………..54
  12. 12. xii List of Tables Table 3.1: Table Showing Sample Frame ..................................................................................... 28 Table 4.1: Table showing the responses……………………………………..…………..………31 Table 4.2: Table Showing the Number of Nationalities Who Participated .................................. 33 Table 4.3: Table Showing the Ages of the Respondents .............................................................. 34 Table 4.4: Table Showing the Gender Of The Respondents ........................................................ 35 Table 4.5: Table Illustrating the Various Causes of Conflict In Migingo .................................... 37 Table 5.1: Table Showing the Diplomatic Options Employed In Resolving the Conflict………41 Table 6.1: Table Showing the Level of Success of the Diplomatic Options Employed…………48 Table 6.2: Table Showing the Relationships among the Respondents in Migingo………...……50
  13. 13. xiii Abbreviations and Acronyms ADR-Alternative Dispute Resolution AU-African Union UN-United Nations BMC-Beach Management Committee BMU-Beach Management Unit CAR-Central African Republic CPA-Comprehensive Peace Agreement DRC-Democratic Republic of Congo EAC-East African Community IGAD- Inter-governmental Authority on Development LVFO -Lake Victoria Fisheries Organization PM-Prime Minister
  14. 14. xiv Operational Definition of Key Terms Angler- refers to a person who fishes using rod or a line in Lake Victoria Bilateral diplomacy - communication limited to Kenya and Uganda at any given time. Conflict- refers serious disagreements between Kenya and Uganda over Migingo Island Conflict Management – It is a situation in which the underlying reasons for a given destructive conflict are eliminated. Mediation -It is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution where an impartial EAC, IGAD or AU, the mediator, assists Kenya and Uganda reach a mutually acceptable agreement regarding their dispute. Negotiation- it refers process of achieving solutions through discussions for the conflict in Migingo Island. Trans-boundary-across or along border of Kenya and Uganda.
  15. 15. 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This chapter introduces the study under the following sections: background to the study, statement to the problem, research objectives, and research questions, significance of the study, justification of the study, scope of the study and limitations of the study. 1.1 Background to the Study Diplomacy is a practice that has been in use for a very long time. Modern diplomacy was pioneered by the ancient Greeks in around 432BC.It has varied definitions but what stand out in most of the definitions is the uniqueness of communication in addressing issues of concerns. The word diplomacy may mean profession, activity or skill of managing international relations, typically by a country’s representatives abroad (Online Dictionary).The meanings of diplomacy have been improved to include: the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or states (Barston, 2006).It is concerned with the management of relations between states and between state and non-state actors. In general, Official Diplomacy or Bilateral Diplomacy refers to a government’s process of communicating with other foreign governments to bring out understanding for its national interest and policies. Bilateral diplomacy is communication limited to two parties at any given time. There is conventional diplomacy, which is conduct of relations on a state-to-state level basis via formally accredited resident missions, and unconventional bilateral diplomacy; which is comprises of relations and communications between states that take place outside the formally
  16. 16. 2 accredited resident missions. The conduct of diplomacy plays an integral part in dictating what happens in international system .Diplomacy applies when the interest of states cannot be fully reconciled, and exhaustive bargaining is required to reveal the area of agreements and disagreements. Bilateral diplomacy involves sensitive political issues unlike other forms of diplomacy (Rouke, 2000) .An example of this type of diplomacy is the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) signed in 2005 between Sudan People’s Liberation Movement and the Government of Sudan facilitated by the Inter-Governmental Authority On Development (IGAD). The conduct of diplomacy may involve discussions, lobbying, diplomatic visits, and treaties among others. Traditional diplomacy was seen as bilateral (between 2 actors).New diplomacy has witnessed the involvement of international organizations such as the UN and AU that negotiate on behalf of their members. Diplomacy is categorized into 3 main tracks i.e. track 1, track 11 and track I and half. Diplomatic options are the approaches employed in addressing points of interests and they are negotiation, mediation, arbitration and adjudication. Negotiation, discussion between two or more parties working out solutions by themselves, can broadly be defined as interaction of influences aimed at reaching an agreement. According to Bern (2008), negotiation is one of the most important means of conducting diplomacy, and in many case results in the conclusion of treaties between sates and the codification of international law. Negotiation refers to the process of making joint decisions when parties involved have different preferences (McCuddy,2003) .Negotiation can also be referred to as interaction of influences aimed at reaching an agreement and can be divided into
  17. 17. 3 instrumental approach and expressive negotiation approach. In an international context, bilateral diplomatic negotiations take place between 2 subjects of international law. Negotiation therefore aims at resolving disputes among parties involved in the conflict, bargaining for individual or collective advantage and crafting some outcomes to satisfy specific interests. It is common knowledge that no one negotiates to lose. Effective negotiation occurs when substance issues are resolved and working relationships are maintained or improved (McCuddy, 2003).The different strategies involved in negotiation are distributive negotiation which focuses on positions staked out or declared by the conflicting parties. Parties try to claim certain portions of existing pie. Integrative negotiation, sometimes called principled negotiation, focuses on the merits of the issues and the parties try enlarging the available pie. Mediation is an informal process during which an impartial third party, the mediator, assists disputing parties in reaching a mutually acceptable agreement regarding their dispute (Alabama Centre for Dispute Resolution, 2007).The mediator does not render a decision or impose a solution on any party but helps those in the conflict talk to each other, thereby allowing them to resolve dispute themselves. Mediation is voluntary, and may be terminated by a party or the mediator. It is a form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).Mediators use appropriate techniques such as evaluative, facilitative or Transformative mediation to open and improve dialogue between disputants aiming to keep the parties reach an agreement. Facilitative mediation popularly known as problem solving mediation is widely practiced and its primary focus is on the problem itself .Mediators encourage parties to explore data and experiences related to the problem (Felicity,2008).
  18. 18. 4 Conflicts Conflicts are basically serious disagreements between two or more opposing sides. There are various types of conflict around the world. Different types of conflict have been experienced ranging from intra-state conflict ,cross-border confrontations and the spill over effects from regional conflicts in the horn of Africa which manifest themselves violently and non violently (Pkalya and Mohammud ,2006).The root causes of conflict in Africa cannot ,however ,be attributed to a single factor, but the causes are interrelated and interwoven into a complete nexus (Kimokoti,2013). Conflict resolution started in the 1950s and 1960s at the height of the cold war when the development of nuclear weapons and the conflict between superpowers seemed to threaten human survival (Ramsbotham,2011).Conflict resolution is a situation in which the underlying reasons for a given destructive conflict are eliminated .Effective resolution begins with a diagnosis of the stage to which conflict has developed and recognition of the causes of conflict (McCuddy ,2003).Conflict resolution has a role to play in war zones since building peace regions and understanding across divided communities is an essential element of humanitarian engagement. Conflict resolution is an integral part of work for development, social justice and social transformation that aims to address the problems facing our society (Ramsbotham, 2011).Conflict dynamics and conflict resolution mechanisms include prevention, peacekeeping, peacemaking and peace building. Trans-boundary conflicts (territorial disputes) are common phenomena around the globe. Virtually, every part of the world has had one or many border conflicts witnessed either in the past or in the Post-World War II Era. The famous border conflict is the Palestine –Israeli border
  19. 19. 5 dispute over the Gaza strip. Some border conflicts are having a Transcontinental face like the Yemen and Somalia border dispute over an archipelago. Even nation sates that are islands like Madagascar have had their own share of problem with Comoros islands. Some of the causes of these conflicts are merely resources (Africa Report, 2012). In East Africa ,border dispute in the East African region can be traced back to colonial period when boundaries were fixed without due regard to the needs of local communities. In many instances, tribes were divided between two states. It was also normal boundary adjustments to be made during colonial era to suit administrative arrangements. Okumu (2010) argues that “at present the hottest border spots are on the Ethiopia-Eritrea border, the Eritrea -Djibouti border, the Somalia-Ethiopia-Kenya borders, the Sudan-Kenya border, the Uganda-DRC border, the Sudan-Chad-CAR-DRC-Uganda borders, and the Kenya-Uganda border. Uganda is seen by many regional states as the major contributor to border conflicts as she has been embroiled in tussle with almost all her neighbors namely Kenya, Rwanda ,South Sudan and even Congo in Central Africa. In recent times, Kenya and Uganda have found themselves disputing over an island called Migingo in Lake Victoria. The diplomatic spat over the island has caused a lot in terms of relations and economies of the two countries. The problem reflected the divisive legacy of colonial boundaries in Africa and the lack of instruments to address border disputes in the continent (Institute for Security Studies,2011).This makes Migingo island dispute serious and this necessitate the study.
  20. 20. 6 1.2 Statement of the Problem Studies conducted have revealed that there has been an escalating conflict over the true ownership of Migingo Trans Boundary Island in the Kenya-Uganda border for almost a decade now. Efforts to resolve the conflict by both governments are yet to bear fruits (Citizen News, 2013). The island is still occupied by the two governments represented by their respective police forces. The Migingo stand-off is a problem because of the continued interference and confusion by the two police forces to the fishermen. The conflict threatens the East Africa pact and also put our territorial integrity into test (Kipkoech, 2010). However, the use of inappropriate strategies to address the problem could have exacerbated the tension between the two neighbors than solving it. The dominant response to the dispute has been the deployment of police forces. From the time the dispute erupted again in 2009, there has been a consistent deployment of policemen from both nations (Shaka, 2009). This has threatened the Kenyan fishermen on island; heightening tension between the two countries. The roles of diplomacy may have not been fully appreciated by both parties. The study therefore aimed at discussing and providing explanations on embracing diplomacy like using bilateral negotiations, mediation and adjudication in resolving the conflict. In employing the diplomatic options, the study examined the importance of using diplomacy in determining the exact owners of the Migingo Island. 1.3Objectives 1.3.1 General objective The general objective of this study was to assess Bilateral Diplomacy and Migingo Island Trans boundary conflict management.
  21. 21. 7 1.3.2 Specific Objectives The specific objectives of this study were to: i. Identify the causes of conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island. ii. Examine bilateral diplomatic options employed in resolving the Migingo island conflict. iii. Evaluate effectiveness of diplomatic options in resolving Migingo Trans boundary conflict. 1.4 Research Questions The study was guided by the following research questions: i. What are the causes of the conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island? ii. What are the diplomatic options employed in resolving the Migingo island conflict? iii. How effective are the diplomatic options in resolving the Migingo conflict? 1.5 Justification of the Study Findings of the research help a lot in theory and practice for the Bilateral Diplomacy and conflict resolving in the disputed Migingo Island, as it contributes to knowledge advancement on the discipline of the International Relations. The findings from the data collected were shared with scholars of IR, other researchers and curriculum developers. These help scholars in responding to conflict management more effectively. To other researchers, this research is useful as it forms a foundation on which they can develop other studies related to the same area and add to the existing literature on bilateral diplomacy and Migingo Trans-boundary conflict, thereby acting as a guide.
  22. 22. 8 Trans-border conflicts could lead to disaster events between states and countries involved. Without strict and fare international policies put in place, disagreements could lead to crisis and chaos in the border region. Thus, due to unresolved conflicts between Kenya and Uganda, the academic aspects of scholars are to study law and formulate policies that will enhance the smooth relation among Trans-border states. The policies need to address issues of resource sharing. The policy will have to indicate the percentage that each country will own and enhance the share ability of the natural resource of the region. With proper established policies, they will lead to cooperation between the states that will foster economic stability, political stability, natural and social cultural stability of the Trans-border countries. In addition, the conflicts also affect the citizens living in the region. Thus, to justify this study, the Kenyan government and the Ugandan state should work hand in hand to establish peaceful co-existence and cooperation of people in Migingo Island, formulate policies and laws that will foster equality between the two states in terms of water percentage ownership and other natural resources within the Island. This will lead to good international relations that will bolster the political, economic and social cultural state of the two countries.
  23. 23. 9 1.6 Scope of the Study The research study is confined within the disciplines of The International Relations particularly Diplomacy and Peace Studies. The set objectives and research questions directed the area under strict focus in this research. The study was conducted between the borders of Kenya and Uganda, specifically Migori County in Kenya and Bugiri District in Uganda. The sample population selected for this study was limited to natives of the two places and a larger percentage of the population was from Migingo Island. The natives must have lived in the disputed island for a period of not less than five years, thus the ability to generalize to the entire population of Migingo and beyond its borders was severely limited. 1.7 Limitations of the Study Limitations of the study included language barrier and unwillingness of government officials to participate in the research. English language spoken by the respondents was fairly understood as most of the fishermen and traders barely attained tertiary level of education. Most of the respondents required translation of the content in questionnaire into either Kiswahili or vernacular languages like Dholuo, which was done to get information. Government officials represented by the BMU officials shunned the process of information inquiry as they termed the issue under focus as sensitive. Almost similar information sought from BMU was, however, obtained by perusal into previous documents of ministerial bilateral meetings available in online journals, media reports among other sources of secondary data.
  24. 24. 10 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW The section analyzes the topic under the following themes: the causes of conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island, the diplomatic options that have been employed so far in resolving the conflict and their impacts, other possible diplomatic options that could be used to resolve the conflict, the gaps identified in literature review, the theoretical framework and the conceptual model. 2.1 The Causes of Conflict over Migingo Island 2.1.1 Conflict Types and Causes Conflicts are serious disagreements between two or more opposing sides. There are various types of conflict around the world. Different types of conflict have been experienced ranging from intra-state conflict, cross-border confrontations and the spillover effects from regional conflicts in the horn of Africa which manifest themselves violently and non violently (Pkalya and Mohammud ,2006). Conflicts can be categorized into different categories namely: relational conflicts that occur because of strong negative emotions, misconceptions, poor communication and even miscommunication, interest based conflicts that are caused by competitions over perceived incompatible needs. Conflicts of interest result when one or more parties or state believe that in order to satisfy her needs, the needs and interests of the opponents must be sacrificed(ibid).a variety of interests underlie and motivate positions in negotiations and must be addressed for maximum resolutions. Perhaps, this can help explain the problem in the Migingo case. Structural types of conflicts are caused by forces external to the people in dispute. Limited physical
  25. 25. 11 resources, geographic constraints and time exacerbate this type of conflict. Most structural conflicts arise out of perceived structural injustices. Generally, most cases of conflicts are economic in nature where there is unequal distribution of resources, political when there is poor governance and thus political unrest and social when different groups become incompatible due to various resources. 2.1.2 Conflict inherent in Migingo Island Migingo Island is an island that lies right along the disputed watery border between Kenya and Uganda in the Lake Victoria. The island is an angler’s paradise, surrounded by schools of tasty and exportable Nile perch (New York Times, 2009). The disputed island, Migingo is measuring an only an acre of land full of rocks , and is located only 10 kilometers off Sori -Bay in Karungu Division, Migori district (Omolo, 2009). The history of conflict over the island dates back to 2004.A Ugandan national by the name Joseph Nsubuga, a fisherman, says he settled on Migingo in 2004 when all he found on the island was an abandoned house. Then other fishermen from Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania came to the island because of its proximity to fishing grounds rich with Nile perch. There was unusual claim by Kenyan fishermen that since no Nile perch breed in Uganda, then the fish somehow ‘belonged to Kenya’(Otieno,2009). In June 2004, and according to the Kenyan government, Uganda marine police came and pitched tent on the island, raised the Ugandan flag and that of police department. A diplomatic row between the two countries arose in February 2009 when Kenyans living on Migingo were required to purchase special permits from the Ugandan government (Shaka, 2013).
  26. 26. 12 On 12 March 2009, a Ugandan government press release proposed that the matter be resolved by a survey, using a guideline by the boundaries set by the Kenya colony and protectorate order in council 1926 and which identifies the boundary line as tangentially touching the western tip of pyramid island ,and then running in a straight line just west of due north to the western tip of Kenya’s Ilembe island(The Independent ,2009).The underlying dispute is over fishing rights in lake Victoria, since Kenya exports more fish than Uganda despite controlling a smaller percentage of the lake(Shaka,2013).The causes of these simmering tensions are resource based(the rich fishing ground).Though it also may be looked at from a political perspective when the Ugandan government may be accused of violating the international law of territorial integrity by stamping their authority on Kenyan soil and waters. The uncompromising stands taken by both Kenya and Uganda in the dispute pose threats to the dreams of East Africa integration that the East African Community is working to realize. This might also affect trade agreements and tariffs in the region since most will be rendered useless once the borders are closed. 2.2Diplomatic Options Employed in Resolving the Migingo Island Trans Boundary conflict The diplomatic options available for conflict resolution are majorly negotiations and mediation. Negotiation aims at resolving disputes among parties involved in the conflict, bargaining for individual or collective advantage and crafting some outcomes to satisfy specific interests. It is common knowledge that no one negotiates to lose. Effective negotiation occurs when substance issues are resolved and working relationships are maintained or improved (McCuddy, 2003).The different strategies involved in negotiation are distributive negotiation that focuses on positions staked out or declared by the conflicting parties. Parties try to claim certain portions of existing
  27. 27. 13 pie. Integrative negotiation, sometimes called principled negotiation, focuses on the merits of the issues and the parties try enlarging the available pie. Mediation is an informal process during which an impartial third party, the mediator, assists disputing parties in reaching a mutually acceptable agreement regarding their dispute (Alabama Centre for Dispute Resolution, 2007).The mediator does not render a decision or impose a solution on any party but helps those in the conflict talk to each other, thereby allowing them to resolve dispute themselves. Mediation is voluntary, and is terminated by a party or the mediator. It is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR).Mediators use appropriate techniques such as evaluative, facilitative or Transformative mediation to open and improve dialogue between disputants aiming to keep the parties reach an agreement. Facilitative mediation popularly known as problem solving mediation is widely practiced and its primary focus is on the problem itself .Mediators encourage parties to explore data and experiences related to the problem (Felicity,2008). In the Migingo dispute, several talks and negotiations have been used to some extent. Though, deployment of police forces from both sides has been the practice since 2004.There have been calls for calm and diplomacy between the two parties in December 2012 and February 2013(ibid).Before then, there have been several government ministries including foreign affairs ministers drawn from both sides meeting in Kampala .This was way back in 2009 and could be touted as the first ever kind of negotiation between the two states. According to Omolo (2009), a week earlier prior to the then PM Raila Odinga visit, a team of Kenya administrators from Migori district headquarters had visited the Island and held talks with their Uganda counterparts from Bugiri district.
  28. 28. 14 The Kenya team comprised Migori DC Julius Mutula and the District Fisheries Officer Tom Jienda and members of the security personnel. They were welcomed by the small, but highly enthusiastic Kenyan fishermen and kiosk traders operating on the island. At hand to receive the Kenyan team was the Ugandan District Commissioner for Bugiri, Ms Mwanamaiza Chikomeko, who welcomed and led the Kenyan delegation to a makeshift camp, heavily guarded by Ugandan security personnel. The Bugiri DC was accompanied by the district police commander Dan Bryaruhunya, the District Fisheries Officer Fred Igoma and several military Intelligence officers. The group settled down for consultative meeting before going out to address the public gathering of anglers and fish traders who were eagerly waiting to hear something about their fate. The meeting was meant for the officials from the two countries to take a joint position on issues that had caused tension on the Island, leading to mass exodus of anglers to other beaches. The delegation reached an agreement that the anglers from both nations be allowed to continue conducting business as usual until the boundary was determined by experts. In March 2009, Ugandan and Kenyan ministers travelled to the island where they held negotiations. However, this ended in a row with the first deputy prime minister of Uganda Eriya Kategaya taking issue with the then Kenyan minister for lands James Orengo for calling the Ugandan delegation ‘hyenas’ during the meeting (Standard Media,2013). Nyanza police provincial officer Joseph Ole Tito at one time led a delegation of Kenyan security contingent on a visit to the island in 2013 and attempted to minimize the magnitude of the incident terming it ‘minor misunderstanding’ (Sabahi, 2013).All their attempts to defuse the situation over Migingo did little to ease the mounting pressure from the public and parliamentarians on Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta (Citizen News, 2013).
  29. 29. 15 On International Law perspective, the real ownership of Migingo Island was to be determined by a joint survey based on colonial maps since all African states respect colonial borders which the organization of African Unity had imbedded in its charter (Kipkoech, 2010). The location of disputed island could be determined in relation to Ilembe and Pyramid islands as described in the 1926 Order in Council. The Kenyan team in the survey places it five hundred and ten (510) meters inside Kenya from the Kenya-Uganda boundary (ibid). 2.3 Other Possible Diplomatic Options in Addressing the Conflict From the previous searches conducted, it can be revealed that the negotiations and talks adopted earlier are seen as having failed to deliver on their mandates. The tension is still rife between the two nations over Migingo. There are many other options of resolving conflict over the disputed Migingo Island such as arbitration, mediation and adjudication. Not all problems are amenable to negotiation. Arbitration is a well-known process of settling disputes. It refers to the use and assistance of neutral third party in conflict, who hears the evidence from both parties, and thereafter renders a decision usually called an award. The award is expected to be binding on both parties (Barston, 2006).An example of a dispute that was solved arbitrarily is the dispute between Israel and Egypt over the location of the border between the two nations in the Gulf of the Red Sea that was settled in favor of Egypt by an international panel in 1988. Adjudication is a method that can be used as an alternative in the international arena and local national system. The courts have the ability to enforce law in the case of a failure of the parties in conflict to reach an agreement through negotiation and mediation. Rulings by international court can end the conflict if the two countries agree to abide by its ruling.
  30. 30. 16 Perhaps, there should be a paradigm shift in the manner the dispute is handled. The citizens of the two countries need to leave at peace and enjoy liberty in doing business. The individuals in a state have the right to own property and lastly that, the most effective economic system is one that promotes and facilitates free trade domestically and internationally(Tim,2008). According to Were (2013),so as to reduce conflict between the two states that is primarily arising out of overdue reliance on Nile Perch, Tilapia and R. argentea ,the communities through the national governments and NGOs should engage in developing and expanding traditional fisheries and non-fish products. The call for diplomacy in addressing the conflict has also been supported by renowned scholars of International Relations .For example, Professor Okoth says that diplomacy is the best option that Kenya can take because it benefits a lot from Uganda in terms of trade and commerce .He also goes on to argue that Kenya and Uganda also collaborates on both regional security and global political issues. The professor challenged East African Community to mediate and resolve the conflict peacefully since international law cherishes peaceful means of conflict resolution (Kipkoech, 2010).In light of the above, Inter-governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) would be required to intervene on the Kenyan-Ugandan case before relations escalates to a charge d’affaires level. Diplomatic forays and previous discussions show that the island might be in Kenya. What is perceived as left is the joint border survey to be completed then the matter being peacefully addressed. This could be achieved in employing alternatives like mediation that will leave both sides feeling satisfied. At some point, constitutional lawyer Anderson Mwiti urged Kenyans
  31. 31. 17 advocating for aggressive response to stop beating the war drum and embrace a spirit of co- existence with Uganda. According to the Standard Media (2013), the long time territorial spat over the island in Lake Victoria was to be solved in a diplomatic manner by the two states. The earlier team sent by the government had stalled due to what the Serian team termed failure to bring all stakeholders on board. Many regional institutions are banking on some more proactive approaches to this conflict. According to Institute for Security Studies (2011), there is urgent need on the side of regional bodies, the East African community, The Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) and African Union (AU) to facilitate the completion of the survey process of the border and establishment of mechanisms to address border disputes on the continent. Whose territory is will be determined through peaceful diplomatic option. Either of the two states will be found to have transgressed some aspects of international law. The dispute over Migingo Trans boundary presents some interesting questions of international law citizenship, regional integration and incomplete decolonization project in Africa (Pambazuka, 2009). And to this far, mediation and options though proposed by many thinkers of IR, are yet to be given a chance. The problem is more complex than it may appear on the face of it and must be dealt with conclusively and with caution. The cost of resolving the conflict needs to be considered seriously. The Transgressing party should ultimately bear this cost. Involving the East African Community (EAC) in the process may provide space for real dialogue between the two nation states.
  32. 32. 18 2.4 Gaps in Literature Review Literature on the use of bilateral diplomatic options like mediation, adjudication to solve the Migingo conflict is limited or nonexistent. The study identified the gaps in the existent literature on addressing the impasse as not having objectively discussed on the application and adoption of other diplomatic options like mediation, adjudication and arbitration in resolving the conflict. No previous study talks about the application of the above methods of resolving conflict or their effectiveness in the addressing the plight of the anglers. There have only been suggestions on what ought to be done alternatively. The present state of peace in Migingo is not talked about. Prevailing of peace may dictate that at least a problem has been addressed to a level that the residents can bear. From the previous searches, we are yet to be told how the dispute has affected the diplomatic ties between Kenya and Uganda and the cooperation on matters of trade, commerce and even politics. 2.5 Theoretical Framework This study was guided by Liberalism theory of International Relations (IR) according to Burchill et al (2005). Liberalism Theory Liberalism, or Idealism as it is widely known, now emphasizes different features of world politics from non-governmental ties between societies to organized cooperation between states, but the different branches of Liberalism unite in three basic assumptions. The three basic assumptions that Liberalism is based on are:
  33. 33. 19 I. Human nature is positive; II. International relations can be cooperative instead of conflictual; and, III. We should believe in progress in human nature, in the state system and in the international system. The Realists are pessimists. They do not trust human beings thinking their nature is bad, they do not trust other states because the main aim of a state should be to maximize their national interests and they believe in conflict. The Idealists (Liberals)are optimists. Liberalism first emerged in the second half of the seventeenth century, with John Locke. However, it gained speed with the Industrial Revolution, when progress was the magic keyword for the society. Industrialization created new norms of living for all parts of the society, new social classes were born, and all of a sudden, everything began to change. The Classical Liberal philosophers, beginning with John Locke, saw great potential for human progress in the modern civil society and capitalist economy. Locke thought that both the civil society and the capitalist economy might succeed in states where individual liberties were guaranteed. For Locke, unlike the Realists, a state exists only to improve the liberty of its citizens so that they could live their lives and pursue their happiness without interference from other people. From Locke on, liberals began to think that state is a constitutional entity, not an instrument for power. A state must establish and protect the rule of law and must respect its citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and property. Thus, Kenya and Uganda should come together to negotiate and be ready to sit in mediation table for the sake of the poor anglers in the disputed island.
  34. 34. 20 Jeremy Bentham also claimed that constitutional states should respect each other and invented the term “international law” and wrote that each state should abide by the international law because it is to the rational interests of states to follow international law in their foreign policies. German philosopher Immanuel Kant came up with ideas that can be considered as the roots of the current varieties of Liberalism. Following Bentham, Kant believed that constitutional states must respect each other and constitutional and mutually respectful states could establish “perpetual (lasting) peace” in the world at the end. Kant’s main contribution is the “democratic peace” doctrine. Kant believed that wars did not start because the international system forced wars on nations, but because domestic problems led governments into war. Modern Liberalism, that is, Liberalism after World War II, may be divided into these categories: a) Sociological Realism; b) Interdependence Liberalism; c) Institutional Liberalism; d) Republican Liberalism. a). Sociological (Pluralist) Liberalism: They believe that the Realists are wrong when they assume IR is a sum of state-to-state relationships. Instead, Sociological Liberals believe that IR is about transnational relations, i.e., relations between people, groups, and organizations belonging to different countries. Relations between people and between NGOs are more cooperative and more supportive of peace than relations between governments are. Karl Deutsch is a prominent scholar of Sociological Liberalism. Deutsch argued in his book Political Community and the North Atlantic Area (1957) that a high degree of Transnational ties between societies led to peaceful relations which would benefit both sides and that is far more important than the absence of war, because it leads to integration and to a sense of community so, no-one would want to use violence to find solutions to their problems. As a result, he and other Sociological Liberals
  35. 35. 21 believe that mutually beneficial cooperation is far preferable for nations than antagonistic conflict. b). Interdependence Liberalism: The Interdependence Liberalism is based on the assumption that when two nations depend on each other, peace will rule. Interdependence means mutual dependence. People and governments are affected by the actions of their counterparts in other countries, so a higher level of transnational relations means greater interdependence. What Interdependence Liberals argue is that a high division of labor in the international economy increases interdependence between states and that high level of interdependence discourages and reduces violent conflicts between states. David Mitrany set up a theory of integration during World War II, and argued that greater interdependence in the form of transnational ties between countries can lead to peace. He believed that expert technicians, not by politicians, should arrange cooperation. It is the main idea behind the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) that led to the formation of the EU. In 1977, Robert Keohane and Joseph S. Nye wrote Power and Interdependence. They argued that previously, use of military force in conflicts between states was an option, because the ‘high politics’ of security and survival came before the ‘low politics’ of economics and social affairs. However, with the new level of integration the World was experiencing since the 1960s, this was no longer the case. They called this new situation Complex Interdependence. They claimed that firstly, relations between states are now different from before because they are no more the limited relations just between state leaders, but relations are far more complex and include many other layers of the society. Secondly, military force is less useful as an instrument in
  36. 36. 22 international relations. As a result, IR is becoming more like domestic politics, with different issues creating different coalitions and different levels of conflict, and in most of these issues, military power is irrelevant. Therefore, leaders and countries now have to deal with “low politics” of economics and social matters, and wars are therefore even less likely to take place. In this new environment, states will have more focus points in their foreign policies and NGOs and international organizations will have greater control and say in the international politics. c). Institutional Liberalism: Institutional Liberalism is based on the idea that international organizations are influential and work for the good of humanity. American President Woodrow Wilson believed that international institutions would change international politics from a “jungle” to a “zoo.” They believe that international organizations are very important, and they can promote cooperation between states. They define an international institution as independent international organisations either such as the NATO or the European Union or as a set of rules that administers state action in a particular area. In our case, the international organizations include the IGAD and EAC. These sets of rules are called “regimes” and generally operate with an international organization that oversees the set of rules’ application Institutional liberals claim that international institutions help promote cooperation between states and the extent of this cooperation is analyzed in terms of depth and scope. In short, for Institutional Liberals, international institutions: o Create a flow of information and opportunities to negotiate with others for each state;
  37. 37. 23 o Enhance the ability of governments to monitor the compliance of other governments with some rules or a set of rules (e.g. Kyoto Accord), and to put their own commitments into operation; and, o Strengthen expectations about the solidity of international agreements. d). Republican Liberalism: The Republican Liberals believe that liberal democracies are more peaceful and law-abiding than any other political system. The main idea is not that democracies never go to war; they do; but it is that democracies do not fight each other. This idea is based on the idea of “perpetual peace” by Immanuel Kant in the 18th century. Michael Doyle wrote in his article “Kant, Liberal Legacies and Foreign Affairs” in Philosophy and Public Affairs in 1983 that democracies do not fight with each other. He presented three reasons: Firstly, in a democracy, domestic political culture is based on peaceful conflict resolution and management; and the voters will not support a government, which would declare war. Secondly, democracies share a common set of values that lead to the formation of a peace zone based on democratic moral values. Thirdly, peace between democracies is strengthened by economic cooperation and interdependence. Among different liberal models of today, Republican Liberalism is the most normative, the most value-based. The Republican Liberals are optimists; they believe in progress and therefore to the coming of a time when war will not be a reality but peaceful conflict resolution.
  38. 38. 24 2.5 The Conceptual Model The conceptual model in figure 2.1 guides this study. Figure 2.1. Bilateral diplomacy and Migingo island Trans boundary conflict management Independent Variable Dependent Variable Bilateral diplomacy Diplomacy tenets expressed through;  government –to-government bilateral talks  use of negotiations  application of mediation  employment of adjudication and arbitration Conflict management Better Conflict management expressed through;  peace prevailing along the boundary  harmonious living among fishermen, traders and residents  border defined  increased co-operation between the two nation states, tightened diplomatic ties  withdrawal of aggressor forces from the island Intervening variables Intervening nation states factors  Transnational relations  Interdependence level  Regime type Figure 2.1: Conceptual model showing relationship among the variables Source: Self conceptualization (2015)
  39. 39. 25 CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This section entails the research design, study area, study and target population, sampling techniques and sample size, data collection instruments, measurements of the instruments validity and reliability, data analysis, presentation of findings and ethical considerations. 3.1 Research Design The research utilized descriptive research design in collecting both the qualitative and quantitative data. A descriptive survey design was used to obtain information about residents of Migingo on bilateral diplomacy and Migingo Island Trans boundary conflict management. A descriptive survey is a research design that allows the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data from the sample of respondents from a population. (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2004) 3.2. Study Area The study area focused on Migingo Island in Lake Victoria. Migingo Island is an island that lies right along the disputed watery border between Kenya and Uganda in Lake Victoria. The island is an angler’s paradise, surrounded by schools of tasty and exportable Nile perch (New York Times, 2009). The disputed island, Migingo is measuring an only an acre of land full of rocks , and is located only 10 kilometers off Sori -Bay in Karungu Division, Migori district. The residents are majorly fishermen and traders. Beach Management Committee (BMC) also forms part of the population.
  40. 40. 26 Figure 3.1: Study Area with Modifications Source:http://search.tb.ask.com/search/maps.jhtml,(2015)
  41. 41. 27 3.3 The Target Population The target population is the population that the researcher wants to generalize the results of the study; (Mugenda and Mugenda, 1999). The study population was drawn from all the residents of the disputed island. The island has 131 registered residents as per the 2009 Kenyan census reports, which provided a study target population. At present, the population is believed to be well over 400(source: http://books.google.com/books?id=soddUrlMbPAC). The respondents comprised of fishermen, traders and beach management unit (BMU). 3.4 Sample Size Sampling is a procedure of selecting a part of the population on which research is to be conducted. A sample must fulfill the requirements of efficiency, representativeness, reliability and flexibility of the population. A recommended sample size of 30% (30 % for a small population) of the population was sufficed to give information on the phenomenon under investigation (Kothari, 2011).Purposive sampling was used to sample fishermen, traders and BMU officials from the entire population. Simple random sampling was used to select the fishermen, traders and BMU officials and care was taken to avoid bias in using this type of sampling. The sample size composed of 40 (39.3 is the calculated sample) respondents. They included 20 fishermen, 15 traders and supported by 5 BMU officials. Sample size determination was guided by the fact that fishermen are the majority, followed by the traders and few BMU officials since they are no recorded statistics on the number of the above type of respondents. Total number of the target population =131 30 % of 131 is calculated as follows: 𝑁 131 *100=30
  42. 42. 28 N= (30∗ 131) 100⁄ N=39.3~ 40 N represents the sample size. Table 3.1: Table Showing Sample Frame Respondent Sample population Fishermen 20 Fish traders 15 BMU officials 5 Total 40 Source: Author (2015) 3.5. Data Collection Instruments This study focused on collecting two major types of data, majorly secondary data and primary data. Primary data was obtained directly from the respondents. One type of questionnaire was used as a tool of primary data collection to aid the secondary data. Questionnaires were administered to the sampled residents of Migingo. Another type of data was secondary data which the researchers obtained by reading several literature and print material from various sources such as online literal works, online journals and newspapers, websites, current news casted by researchers and reporters with interest in the blooming Migingo dispute.
  43. 43. 29 3.5 Validity and Reliability of the Research Instruments Procedures for ascertaining validity and reliability of data collection instruments are discussed below. 3.6.1 Validity Validity implies the accuracy and meaningfulness of inferences based on research finding and has to do with how accurately the data obtained in the study measures the variables. To measure content validity assistance was sort from the supervisors and other research experts in the department of Peace and Conflict studies who assessed the relevance of the content in the research tools against objectives of the study. 3.6.2 Reliability Reliability is the extent to which a given test is capable of consistently yielding the same results or nearly the same score each time the test is administered to the same individuals in spite of any opportunity for variations to occur. To test instrument reliability, a test-retest method was employed to conduct study on five potential respondents who hail from or must have worked in Migingo Island or the larger Migori County. Questions were designed and put across explicitly and a guide provided to give direction on how to respond. Responses were recorded accurately and coded accordingly to avoid errors. 3.6 Data Analysis and procedure The research project utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis. The raw data from the field was organized and coded for subsequent analysis. The data collected was analyzed using Excel spreadsheets .Data from questionnaires was analyzed using descriptive
  44. 44. 30 statistical technique then presented using tables and graphs to show the relationship among the variables in this study. 3.7 Ethical Considerations To ensure protection of the researcher’s integrity and honesty of results, the researcher ought to be ethical. The ethical considerations included informed consent, confidentiality, privacy and no harm to respondents. On informed consent, the researcher gave all the facts about the research and asked respondents to participate voluntarily, as advised by Kothari (2011). Confidentiality was maintained by keeping the respondents’ identity and responses private while on privacy, the researcher asked the respondent not to write the name of self anywhere on the questionnaire item, and during data analysis, the participants were identified using codes rather than by names.
  45. 45. 31 CHAPTER FOUR CAUSES OF CONFLICT IN MIGINGO ISLAND This chapter presents findings and discussions on the causes of conflict in Migingo Island, The results are presented in texts, tables, pie charts, graphs and bar charts. The analyzed data was specifically aimed at providing answers to the research objectives. Demographic data of the respondents were analyzed using descriptive statistics that gave data the background information regarding the respondents .Data was collected from fishermen or fisherwomen, traders engaged in the selling of fish and beach management unit from both Migori county in Kenya and Bugiri district in Uganda. 4.1 Response Rate The study targeted 40 respondents being 20 fishermen/women, 15 fish traders and 5 BMU officials from the study area .Out of the targeted sample ,19 fishermen ,17 fish traders and 1 BMU official completed and returned the questionnaires . Table 4.1: Table Showing the Responses Respondent Sample size Responded ( N) Percentage % Fishermen 20 19 95 Fish traders 15 17 113.3 BMU officials 5 1 20 Total 40 36 90 Source: Field Data, (2015) *N=36
  46. 46. 32 The study gave a response rate of 90 %.Fishermen responses were the largest while the traders over responded .The beach management unit official was only one. The indication of the least participation by the official could have been due to the sensitivity of the issue under dispute. In general, 4 respondents or 10 % of the respondents did not return the research instrument used. According to Mugenda and Mugenda, a response rate of 30 %and above is adequate for generalization, a response rate of 50 % is good for generalization while a response rate of 70% and above is excellent for generalization of findings from a sample onto the entire population which such as sample is drawn. With regard to this study, the response rate was excellent for purposes of generalization of findings. 4.2 Demographic Data of the Respondents The main purpose of this study was to assess bilateral diplomacy and Migingo Island Trans boundary conflict management. As such, the study found it paramount to find out the demographic characteristics of the fishermen, fish traders (fish mongers) and BMU officials since they form the basis under which the interpretations of the data collected would be justified. Demographic characteristics of the respondents were discussed based on the nationality of the respondents, age gender and the nature of work the respondents undertake on daily basis. These characteristics were presented in tables, pie charts and graphs.
  47. 47. 33 4.2.1 Nationality of the Respondents Table 4.2: Table Showing the Number of Nationalities Who Participated Nationality Frequency Percentage % Kenya 27 75.0 Uganda 8 22.2 Others 1 2.8 Total 36 100.0 Source: Field Data, (2015) Majority of the respondents were from Kenya with a 75 %.Respondents from Uganda were 22.2. % and other nationality was only represented by one respondent from Tanzania .The low percentage of respondents from other countries though present in the island could be due to the non involvement of the their governments in the conflict or they want to reap from both parties in the conflict once a conclusive peace agreement is signed between the two. Figure 4.1: Pie Chart Showing the Nationality of the Respondents Source: Field Data, 2015 75% 22% 3% NATIONALITY Kenya Uganda others
  48. 48. 34 4.2.1 Age Bracket of the Respondents Table 4.3: Table Showing the Ages of the Respondents Age Frequency ( f) % 18-24 16 44 25-30 12 33 31-35 5 14 Over 35 3 8 Total 36 100 Source: Field Data, (2015) Findings revealed that 44 % of the respondents were aged between 18 and 24, which also happened to be the largest. 12 Respondents or 33 %were aged between 25 and 30 years while 5 were aged between 31 to 35 years. Respondents above the age of 35 were only 3 representing 8% of the total population of the respondents .The least percentage of the respondents happens to be the adults as they have surpassed the maximum age limit of the youth of 35 years. This is an indication that most of the fishermen are youths who engage in fishing to find alternative mechanisms of coping with life which have always remained marginalized due to high unemployment rate in the two countries in under study.
  49. 49. 35 4.2.3 Gender The gender of the respondents is depicted by the table 4.4. Table 4.4: Table Showing the Gender of the Respondents Gender frequency % Male 25 69 female 11 31 Total 36 100 Source: Field data, (2015) Figure 4.2: Bar Graph Depicting the Gender of the Respondents Source: Field data (2015) Most of the respondents were male with 69 % .This represented more than half of the respondents .The females were only 31 % or 11 respondents from the sample size. The low 0 50 100 Male female PERCENTAGE GENDER GENDER OF THE RESPONDENTS
  50. 50. 36 women responses may have be affected with their perceived inferiority complexes when they are among the males. The women may have felt insubordinate to their male counterparts. Most women do not also engage in fishing which is normally felt to be a male-aligned career. The few available women around the beaches are left to majorly participate in selling of the fish. Most of the women believed that men are the sole decision makers in any societal setting and information inquiry and such our research was going to be no exception. 4.3 The Causes of the Conflict in Migingo Trans Boundary Island The first objective of the study was to identify the causes of conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island that is found in Lake Victoria between the borders of Kenya and Uganda. To effectively address this objective, the following research question was asked; What are the causes of the conflict over Migingo Trans Boundary Island? Items in the data collection instruments relating to the causes of the conflict in the disputed island were analyzed by counting and calculating percentages using excel spreadsheets and findings presented in table 4.5.
  51. 51. 37 Table 4.5: Table Illustrating the Various Causes of Conflict in Migingo Cause Frequency % Scarce resources over island and the lake 20 45 Territorial integrity claims 12 27 Different economic levels 4 5 Perceived Regional rivalry 6 14 Competing government’s interests (politics) 4 9 Total 44 100 Source: Field data (2015) Findings in table 4.5 showed that scarce resources accounted for 45 %, territorial claims accounted for 27 %, different economic level as a claim accounted for only 5 %, regional rivalry contributed to 14 % and politics what is basically understood by this study as competing governments’ interests accounted for 9%. 4.3.1 Resources The major cause of conflict in the disputed Migingo Island is undoubtedly over the scarce resources and rare resources found mainly in Migingo Island as revealed by 20 responses. Half of the respondents mentioned resources as the leading cause of the dispute between the two East African nations. Resources in this case are the fish especially the Nile perch which is deemed to have high level of oil. In fact some of the respondents gave multiple responses on the above attribute because of the impact of the conflict on the fishermen who also happened to be the majority of the respondents. One of the respondents said “let the Ugandans leave our fish for us so that we can be peaceful.”Conflicts over the resources have direct effect on the part of the
  52. 52. 38 anglers while indirect impact on the part of the governments in the long term which could be measured by the level of diplomatic engagements between the two disputing countries. 4.3.2 Territorial integrity claim Territorial integrity claim is seen to be the second leading cause of the conflict by most respondents .This could be another major factor due to the historical facts of Uganda’s troubled borders with her neighbors. The 27 % of the respondents believed that Uganda might just want the portion of the lake which she believed was taken away from her in the colonial period. Uganda has claimed annexation of her borders in almost all her neighbors as was revealed in the reviewed literature .Uganda disputed the border with Tanzania up to River Kagera at one time. In September 2014 border conflict broke out in the district of Moyo in northern Uganda between Ugandans and south Sudanese,(Ogwal, 2014). 4.3.3 Regional rivalry and Economic Level Regional rivalry and in matter of development played little in the findings due to their near equal level of Kenya and Uganda although Kenya is seen to be some miles ahead of Uganda in development .Kenya recently joined the middle income status after rebasing their GDP. Uganda is yet to attain such a status. The conflict in Migingo started way back in 2004 and resurfaced in strongly in 2009 until it became hot issue in both governments’ cycles. Economically, Kenya is believed to be exporting more fish than Uganda yet Uganda has the largest share of the lake Victoria on her side which is supposed to translate to more fish .Apparently, this has turned out to be indirectly proportional to the catch .It is imperative to claim that economics has a hand in the causing the dispute over the Migingo island.
  53. 53. 39 4.3.4 Political interests Politics as factor could not also be bypassed as 9 % of the respondents mentioned the issue as a concomitant cause of the conflict in the island and around the border. Findings of this study were compared with findings made in empirical studies relating to The East African Community and Dispute Settlement: A Case of Migingo Island by one Njoka D. Warui of the Institute Of Diplomacy and International Studies of University of Nairobi. According to Njoka (2013), twenty respondents were asked to identify the causes of the dispute, 9(45%) of the respondents identified fishing rights as the main cause, 7(35%) identified it as a boundary dispute, while, 3(15%) of the respondents attributed the dispute to political posturing, 1(5%) respondent attributed the dispute to lack of dispute settlement strategies between the two countries. According to Were (2013), the Ugandan state has not disguised her intent to control fisheries resources oh her part of Lake Victoria. He continues to argue that the quest for control and dominance over the natural resource of Lake Victoria between Kenya and Uganda has negatively affected trans boundary resource management.Njoka (2013), postulates that Migingo Island dispute is primarily about fisheries on the International boundary between Kenya and Uganda as indicated by (45%) and (35%) of the respondents. The island provides ideal fish landing point unlike Ugingo and Pyramid Island which are inaccessible due to their steep gradients. He continues to argue that the Migingo Island dispute is in conformity to Wanyama’s definition of dispute ‘the contentions or disagreements that arise between interested parties in a given issue or activity. The dispute is about fisheries on the international maritime boundary of the two states. The concept of dispute is related to that of conflict.
  54. 54. 40 According to Byaruhanga (2007),in lake Victoria region fish markets appears to be unstable due to the structural changes currently taking place in the production and marketing of fish and fish products. Mitchell’s defines conflict ‘as a situation whereby two or more parties have incompatible goals’. The incompatibility of goals case may relate to the location of the fisheries which is on the international boundary and the idealness of Migingo Island and for fish landing. 4.4 Summary At the core of the problem is the resource dispute relating to fisheries which fishermen from the countries are competing for. The incompatibilities and disagreements between Kenya and Uganda on Migingo Island are therefore of a resource and trans boundary nature or in this study it is the territorial integrity claim. The Uganda government has on several occasions admitted that the island belongs to Kenya while maintaining that the water around it belongs to Uganda. These kinds of statement coming from Ugandan government sources are very ‘telling’on the islands ownership. It has a bearing on the disagreement on what constitutes the western most point of any of the islands.
  55. 55. 41 CHAPTER FIVE DIPLOMATIC OPTIONS EMPLOYED IN RESOLVING THE MIGINGO ISLAND TRANS BOUNDARY CONFLICT This chapter entails discussions and analysis of diplomatic options that have so far been used in solving the Trans boundary conflict in Migingo. Diplomatic options available for peaceful conflict resolution include: mediation, negotiation, dialogue, arbitration, among others. 5.1 Diplomatic Options Employed The second objective of the study sought to determine the diplomatic options employed so far in resolving the conflict in the disputed island along the watery border between Kenya and Uganda. The findings of the study were tabulated and analyzed in the table 5.1. Table 5.1: Table Showing the Diplomatic Options Employed in Resolving the Conflict Diplomatic option Frequency % Negotiation 12 33 Mediation 6 17 Arbitration 3 8 Dialogue 15 42 Total 36 100 Souce:Field data,(2015)
  56. 56. 42 Figure 5.1: Diplomatic Options Employed Source: Field data, (2015) The study revealed that 33 % of the respondents mentioned that negotiation was employed in solving the conflict while mediation was mentioned by 17 % of the sample population. The most mentioned option was dialogue in other words talks s it was mentioned by 42 % while arbitration attracted the least percentage of the respondents at only 8 %. The meanings of the diplomatic terms were explained to the respondents in the language they most understood for instance Kiswahili and vernacular , and as result most the respondents believed that majorly dialogue has been the norm since the conflict erupted. In deed, a respondent once said “I only saw James Orengo and those officials from Uganda in a corner seriously conversing”. Dialogue is simply talk or conversation between two or more people discussing positions or beliefs especially between groups to resolve a disagreement (The Free Dictionary, 2015).Negotiation which is defined as process of achieving solutions through discussion between two parties. Some of the respondents might have interchanged the two concepts namely dialogue and negotiation to mean 33% 17% 8% 42% Diplomatic options Negotiation Mediation Arbitration Dialogue
  57. 57. 43 either because they have almost the same meanings, and this could explain the high percentages of the two. Findings of the study compare with the reviewed literature that highlighted the options that have been employed so far in the following manner. According to Njoka (2013), his study sought to identify the bilateral and multi- lateral steps that had been undertaken towards the settlement of the dispute. The bilaterally diplomatic negotiations undertaken had culminated in a number of ministerial and technical meetings that had been held between the officials of the two countries. Some meetings are discussed in the following section: 5.2 Dialogue 5.2.1 Kampala Bilateral talks The first bilateral meeting at Ministerial level was held in Kampala, Uganda on 13 th March2009. The meeting agreed on the primary reference documents from their archives and colonial records to be used, the withdrawal of security forces from the island, a joint boundary survey, stoppage of harassment of fishermen and the enforcement of the Lake Victoria Fisheries Organization (LVFO) fishing regulations. The agreed primary reference documents included the British Order in Council of 1926, schedules to the Kenyan Constitution of 1963 and the Ugandan Constitution of 1995.The joint boundary survey work was to be carried out and completed within two months by May,2009. It was seen that the dispute settlement process was to be pursued within the established framework of the EAC cooperation and the desired objective of regional integration (GoK /GoU, Ministerial Bilateral Meeting of March 2009). Despite the meeting held in Kampala many reports of continued harassment of fishermen and rising tensions on Migingo Island emerged. As a result a joint Ministerial fact finding tour of
  58. 58. 44 Migingo was conducted on March 2009 and both delegations re-iterated their commitment to the Kampala agreements. During this meeting Kenya demanded the immediate removal of the Ugandan flag from the Island pending the determination of the ownership of the Island. Uganda on her part pleaded for time to allow for further consultations before they could respond to Kenya’s demand. As a result of the first meeting unresolved dispute .The second meeting in Kisumu took place. 5.2.2 Kisumu Technical Officers’ meeting After the talks in Uganda technical meetings were held separately for surveyors and the police. The Police Chiefs held their meeting in Kampala on April 2009 and agreed on the deployment of security personnel (GoK/GoU., Joint Technical Officers Report held in Kisumu on 7th 2009). The surveyors meeting was held in Kisumu on 7 th - 8 th May 2009 and the meeting agreed on the surveying methodologies and modalities. Currently, Kenya and Uganda are collaborating in policing the island. 5.3 Negotiation 5.3.1 Bilateral Ministerial meeting over the launch of border survey in Migingo Island This was a bilateral ministerial meeting held on 11 th May 2009.This was a follow up of the Kampala, Lusaka and Arusha meetings, the latter two meetings were held on the margins of a SADC and EAC Summit meetings respectively, held between the two Heads of State. The bilateral meeting was also used to launch the survey of the Kenya–Uganda border in Lake Victoria. The meeting concluded that the ‘survey shall be guided by the following documents,1926 Order in Council,1963 Kenya Constitution,1995 Uganda Constitution and any other relevant
  59. 59. 45 documents’. The joint survey team was to start its work immediately and was expected to be finished by the end of 2012.The survey was to be inconformity with the AU and UN requirements that all countries execute their international boundary protocols and deposit them with the AU by 2012(Gok/GoU., Joint Chiefs of Police Report, held in Kampala on 2nd April, 2009). 5.4 Survey It is an act of measuring and examining an area of land. It may also mean plotting a detailed map over an area of land by measuring and calculating distances and height. 5.4.1 The Joint Survey between Kenya and Uganda Experts After the formal launch of the survey process, the survey work was to begin from the middle of the Sio River southwards following the description in the Order in Council. The joint survey team was further expected to determine which was Pyramid Island between the two islands next to Migingo Island. This was to be determined alongside the location of Migingo Island. The survey teams were expected to clearly demarcate the boundary with straight lines from Remba Island on the two islands and to report on the two findings of the survey. In the determination of the boundary at the tri-junction of Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania, the latter would be requested to join the survey team presumably because of any future intent. The survey team was required to work in the spirit of EAC cooperation and in case of disagreement an independent expert would be contracted to assist. When the survey process would be complete of the maritime boundary the team was to survey the rest of the unmarked boundary points up to with the tri-junction with South Sudan ( GoK / GoU., Joint Communiqué, Bilateral Meeting on Migingo Island 11th May,2009 ).however ,by now the public is yet to be told any outcome regarding the matter.
  60. 60. 46 5.5 Summary The negotiations helped to calm down the tense situation and led to the constitution of a technical survey team to survey the two countries international boundary which started and later stalled. Multi laterally not much has taken place other than the two side summit meetings held during the AU meeting in Lusaka and the EAC meeting in Arusha both in 2009. It is therefore evident that there were negligible multi lateral attempts towards the settlement of the dispute. Bilaterally there were a series of diplomatic initiatives. The EAC emphasizes on the promotion of peace, security and good neighborliness between partner States. The EAC provisions in the treaty empower any partner state to refer issues with a bearing to the treaty to it. These provisions provided an opportunity for Kenya and Uganda to lodge their dispute with the EAC. From the findings it is evident that neither of the two states has referred the dispute anywhere for arbitration.
  61. 61. 47 CHAPTER SIX EFFECTIVENESS OF DIPLOMATIC OPTIONS IN RESOLVING THE MIGINGO ISLAND CONFLICT This chapter entails discussions and analysis of the effectiveness of the diplomatic options that have so far been used in solving the Trans boundary conflict in Migingo, evidences of success and diplomatic options available for the conflict management in Migingo. 6.1 Effectiveness of Diplomatic Options The third objective was to evaluate effectiveness of diplomatic options in resolving Migingo Trans boundary conflict and to adequately address this objective, the following research question was formulated; How effective are the diplomatic options in resolving the conflict? The study sought to answer the above question by asking the respondents to record the level of successes of the options they mentioned as having been employed in the objective two against the option. On a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 very unsuccessful and 5 very successful the following items in the questionnaires were analyzed and tabulated in the table 6.1.
  62. 62. 48 Table 6.1: Table Showing the Level of Success of the Diplomatic Options Employed Source: Field data (2015) Figure 6.1: The Level of Success of the Diplomatic Options Employed Source: Field data, (2015) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% NEGOTIATIO N MEDIATION ARBITRATIO N DIALOGUE OTHERS VERY SUCCESSFUL 33% 17% 0% 33% 17% SUCCESSFULL 27% 0% 0% 64% 9% NOT SURE 29% 29% 0% 43% 0% UNSUCCESSFUL 40% 30% 0% 30% 0% VERY UNSUCCESSFUL 50% 0% 0% 50% 0% PERCENTAGES The level Of Successofthe Diplomatic Options Employed Option Very successful (5) Successful (4) Not sure(3) Unsuccessful(2) Very unsuccessful(1) f % f % f % f % f % Total Negotiation 2 33 3 27 2 29 4 40 1 50 12 Dialogue 2 33 7 64 3 43 3 30 1 50 16 Arbitration 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mediation 1 17 0 0 2 29 3.0 30 0 0 6 others 1 17 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 6 100 11 100 7 100 10 100 2 100 36
  63. 63. 49 The findings revealed that dialogue and negotiation were the most employed options in resolving the conflict and their level of successes were found to be both 33 % very successful in resolving the conflict. Their unsuccessfulness was mentioned by 50 % of the respondents or in other words half of the respondents were not in agreement with the options as the best in solving the dispute. Arbitration was not mentioned as an option and consequently it received the least percentage of success of 0%.Generally, it is logical not to measure the success of what has not been employed to examine a certain attribute. 6 respondents that mentioned mediation believed that it was 17 % very successful. The respondents had earlier on mentioned EAC as the main actor that had tried to settle the dispute. The 2(5%) respondents who mentioned others suggested that the level of success of those other options was 17 % very successful when compared with negotiation and dialogue that both stood at 33 % success level. The ‘other’ mentioned included joint border survey, military patrol in the island .The low percentage of the ‘other’ attribute could be attributed to the fact that most of the patrols were done by the Ugandan government officials. The respondents claimed that they had suffered harassment in fishing and doing business in Migingo Island. 6.2 Evidences of Successes 6.2.1 The Nature of Relationship among the Respondents in Migingo. The respondents were asked to describe the relationship with their counterparts from a neighboring country in the island. The responses were as shown table 6.2:
  64. 64. 50 Table 6.2: Table Showing the Relationships among the Respondents in Migingo Relationship FREQUENCY % Excellent 0 0 Very good 6 17 Good 7 19 Fair 10 28 bad 8 22 Very bad 5 14 TOTAL 36 100 Source: Field Data, (2015) The findings revealed that 28 %of the respondents had fair relationship with their counter parts from another country .They had remained unaffected sociologically and undisturbed by the dispute in question. None of the respondents described their relationship as perfect and solid while only 36 % explained that they were doing fine with their neighbors. Another 36 % of the respondents indicated that they were not in good terms with their neighbors. The 28 % of the respondents who suggested that their relationship was unaffected thought that the issue at hand is a small matter that should not extend to their private and social lives with their neighbors. The Kenyan fishermen were the most affected since a good number of them responded that they hated their neighbors because they had overstepped their borders and were reaping from their side. Another reason for the negative relationship was the constant harassment and disturbance by the beach officials and the police officers keeping peace in the island. The above findings proved that the options employed are yet to deliver results or have almost failed to bring peace and settle the dispute in the island. At the inter-state relations, Kenyans are
  65. 65. 51 normally viewed with negative connotations and this may have heightened the tense relationship witnessed in Migingo. Past researches on the dispute on the island had shown that the impact of the dispute has taken toll on the fishermen, traders and even diplomats of both governments. The relationship between the Kenyan and the Ugandan government appears not have been disturbed, but issues can develop into mega issues that can prove an uphill task to resolve amicably. 6.2.2 The Kenyan-Uganda border in Lake Victoria. To further ascertain the success of the diplomatic options employed, the residents were asked to suggest whether the Migingo Island was in Kenya or Uganda .The following responses were obtained.81 % (29 respondents) suggested that Migingo was in deed in Kenya while the rest (19%) said that the island is Ugandan. The study also revealed that most of those polled from Kenya said that the island was Kenyan; majority of Ugandans said it belonged to them and one Ugandan interestingly disagreed with his fellows and said it was Kenyan. The above line of thinking can be traced from our political leaders’ opinions. Majority of citizens in a nation like Kenya or Uganda tend to align their thinking in the same way just like the politicians. Nationalism could also be a driving factor in the way the people responded. Evidences from the British (the colonizer of both nations) archives, famously the 1926 Order in council and the constitution of Uganda second schedule state the following: “Commencing in the waters of Lake Victoria on a parallel 18 south latitude, at the point due south of the westernmost point of Pyramid Island; thence the boundary follows a straight line due north to that point; thence continuing by a straight line, still northerly to the most westerly point of Ilemba Island; thence by a straight line, still northerly, to the
  66. 66. 52 most westerly point of Kiringiti Island; thence by a straight line, still northerly, to the most westerly point of Mageta Island; thence by a straight line north-westerly to the most southerly point of Sumba Island; thence by the south-western and western shores of that island to its most northerly point; thence by a straight line north-easterly to the centre of the mouth of the Sio River” Figure 6.2 illustrates some of the specifications mainly at the westernmost part of Pyramid Island. Figure 6.2: The Location of Migingo Island by satellite image Source: en.wikipenda.org/wiki/Migingo Island (2015)
  67. 67. 53 6.3 The Diplomatic Options Available to Resolve the Migingo Island Trans Boundary Dispute The study sought to find answers to the problem that is threatening Kenya’s relations with Uganda (a one time largest trading partner with Kenya) over the ownership of the disputed island. The findings revealed that47% of the respondents suggested mediation,23% supported ongoing negotiations,some12 % mentioned arbitration, 14 % of the sample stated that the island be declared a no man’s land and only 5% said that respondents should just accommodate each other and the rest the case. In other words, the latter meant that the matter be left as it is because it has no major impact on the part of the citizens of the two nations. Those respondents who mentioned mediation suggested that the EAC should play the role of the mediator .The AU and the UN were also part of the mediators adversely mentioned. Some studies, however, revealed otherwise in the management of border disputes in Africa. According to Mnjama (2012), border disputes in West Africa have been common but most of them have been settled amicably. Below is figure 6.3 showing the options that solved the dispute.
  68. 68. 54 Source : Kornprobst (2002) Conflicting States Disputed Border Years Conflict Management Liberia -Guinea Mount Nimba region 1958-1960 Negotiations led to Agreement Mali - Mauritania (a) Hodh desert border; 1958±63 Negotiations lead to agreement (b) Savannah region in Djel Mael 1958-63 Negotiations led to agreement Liberia –Cote d’ivoire Ewe-inhabited area of Ghana 1960-1975 Negotiations led to disengagement. Figure 6.3: The Diplomatic Options and the Conflict They Resolved
  69. 69. 55 6.3.1 Continuous use of Negotiations Negotiations are processes of achieving solutions through discussion between two parties that are embroiled in a conflict. The parties reach solutions by themselves. Kenya and Uganda have tried this albeit with some limited success. From the past studies, it is observed that time is also a factor in carrying out negotiations. Some negotiations had taken long to yield results while others very short time like two years as evidenced by Liberia and Guinea. Perhaps, negotiations should be carried alongside mediation and possibly arbitration to fast track the conflict management. Some of the challenges that have emerged from the bilateral negotiations relate to interpretations of the Ministerial bilateral communiqués by the technical teams and technical disagreements relating to professional approaches to the survey works between the Kenya and Uganda teams. 6.3.2 Applying Mediation and Arbitration Mediation allows for the involvement of a third disinterested party in the conflict. He/she works with the parties to resolve the underlying conflict. The mediator in the Kenyan –Ugandan case can be the EAC, AU or even the UN. The mediator listens and give directions on the best way forward to adopt but does not impose solutions on the parties. Mediation has some peculiar advantages when the parties to the conflict, in this case Kenya and Uganda, have relations that must continue after the dispute is managed. Researchers have often argued that mediation creates a framework for resuming normal relations after the particular concern has been resolved. Some of the benefits that come with mediation include: mediation is

×