The Greek Philosopher Aristotle said that man by nature is a social animal and because of that nature man can’t live in isolation as he needs others to satisfy his numerous needs. Moreover, no man is self-sufficient. Just like man, states need each other and can’t live in isolation. After the 1648 Westphalia treaty, the end of World War I and World War II coupled by decolonization, there were growth and development of nation states. States became sovereign entities providing impetus for inter-state relationships.
Foreign Policy became an important agenda in guiding inter-state relationships – largely viewed as a vision of a desired outcome or set of interests in interacting with another state/actor including the strategies and ideas used in achieving these goals and the available resources at a state’s disposal in guiding her interaction with other states. At the core of foreign policy is the fulfilment of a country’s national interests and objectives and these are determined by several factors at play.
One of the most enduring theories of international relations that can explain foreign policy decisions of other states is Realism. Realism is concerned with the world as it is actually rather than how it ought to be. Classical Realism is deeply rooted in the imperfect nature of man – as egoistic and self-centered. The pursuit of power defines states interests and that state seeks to maximize power relative to others. This could lead to security dilemma where one nation’s attempt to increase its security can result into the other doing so, leading to an arms race and potential for war. The theory goes on to assert that states are primary actors in international affairs and that national interests determine state behavior. States are rational egoist meaning that states just like human beings also calculate the pros and cons of their actions and decisions and pursue the most appropriate one that attains specific outcomes they desire at the minimum cost possible. Realists maintain that the distribution of power or capabilities largely determines international outcomes, and this is particularly true for advanced economies with material capabilities.
Uganda’s Foreign Policy and actions can be viewed from an Afro-Centric lens. Looking at Uganda’s engagement particularly with the ring states or immediate neighbors, East African Community, Inter Governmental Authority on Development, Nile Basins and the region; the rest of Africa – the African Union, COMESA, the Middle East and the rest of the world. This includes Uganda’s engagement at the United Nations General Assembly, United Nations Security Council and development partners, bilateral and multilateral donors, international organizations and agencies and regional blocs e.g., G7, G20, BRICS.
One of Uganda’s Foreign Policy is to contribute to building a peaceful and secure world through involvement in peace support operations. By taking an active role as a nation state and not underlining the proactive use of liberal institutions and normative frameworks as essential towards peace stabilization, Uganda manifest a realist character in its dealings with other nations and actors.
Uganda has been central in both peace keeping and peace building in the region. For instance, under a standby agreement with United Nations, Uganda reserves a portion of its armed forces for deployment at short notice. Example., Uganda contributed troops to Somalia (AMISOM), contributed Police, Prison Officers and civilian experts to UN Mission in Liberia (UNMIL) in 1994 under the Economic Community of West African States Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) and to the United Nations/African Union Hybrid Mission in Darfur (UNAMID).
Uganda’s contribution has benefited the United States and the rest of the region against the war on terror. The country’s efforts can be seen from a pragmatic point of view; that it is interested in solving the real challenges the region faces, walking the talk and not being idealistic about what ought to be done. While financial resources from the United States government and other donors have facilitated its contribution towards peace keeping and peace building, Uganda’s role can be interpreted as that which is about projecting its power as a force willing to stabilize the region despite the risks associated with such political-level decisions.
Moreover, Uganda has contributed to peace stabilization as a mediator and peace guarantor. For example, in December 2013 the government of Democratic Republic of Congo and the rebel group M23 reached an understanding called the Nairobi Declarations to end a protracted struggle in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Uganda continues to lead the Burundi Peace Process while it’s one of the mediators and guarantor to the revitalized agreement on the resolution of conflict in South Sudan. Seeing a peaceful country and the region devoid of security challenges is a realist vision and this can be accentuated by Uganda’s pursuit of security interests seen in its ever prioritization of security and defense in the allocation of its national resources since Mr. Museveni ascended to power in 1986.
The Country’s Foreign Policy can also be seen from an interventionist point of view. For instance, In December 2013, the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) intervened in South Sudan, averted a blood bath, facilitated evacuations of Ugandans and foreigners trapped in Juba. Many reasons were advanced by Government of Uganda for this intervention. One, that it had been invited by the legitimate government of Kiir to protect civilians and further protect potential damage to country’s critical installations by the armed forces loyal to Riek Machar, that Inter Governmental Authority on Development and the UN Secretary General had asked her to intervene. Political analysts believes that Uganda’s need to protect its economic interests, above all, supersedes the other reasons advanced. This can only be interpreted as a realist proposition after all, self-interests determine a realist foreign policy decision.
Another foreign policy objective of the country could also be seen in regard to the country’s willingness to provide humanitarian assistance to refugees. Uganda hosts largest refugee population in Africa; 3rd largest in the world and maintains an open refugee door policy. Contributing to Peace Support Operations reflects Uganda’s broader international relations in dealing with the United Nations and other bodies based on pragmatic strategy driven by national interests.
As already noted, foreign policy is seen as advancement of state interests. National interest seen as self-preservation, independence, economic well-being and military security. Gakwandi (2013) argues that Uganda’s national interest that shapes its foreign policy objectives are premised on three main pillars. 1) National security (state survival, people, endowments, regional peace and security) 2) National prosperity (provision of trade, investments, tourism and regional integration) 3) Well-being of Ugandans (provision of protocols and consular services at home and abroad).
While Uganda do not have a coherent foreign policy or national security strategy, its foreign policy decisions are guided by pragmatic actions as illustrated above. Pragmatist in international relations offer similar attributes to realists and can actually be assumed as realism even in its traditional sense. These are consistent with the view that Foreign Policy is discrete purposeful actions that results from the political level decisions of an individual or groups of individuals including governments. Foreign Policy is thus not the decision but the product of that decision.
Moses Owiny, Centre for Multilateral Affairs
