We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter introduces two concepts to understand the dynamics at the Juba Peace Talks between the Lord’s Resistance Army/Movement (LRA/M) and the Government of Uganda. For the LRA/M, the main way of approaching the talks was through a mechanism of ‘connect/disconnect’. The LRA/M progressed by alternating its levels of engagement and kept control by maintaining a fluid, often a vague process. Progress and change came through reaching out in certain moments; control was maintained by pulling back in others. In contrast, international actors supporting the Juba Peace Talks function on a mechanism of ‘galvanic surges’: To continue support to the talks needed continuously developing momentum and consensus to remain committed to the peace talks. Running in parallel, the two approaches created a syncopated rhythm. Profound misinterpretation occurred in moments when external momentum hit a period of lesser LRA/M engagement; at other times, strong LRA/M engagement did not coincide with external momentum. The two operational modes mismatched and thus outside support and reassurances for the process were withdrawn just when the LRA/M had entered a time of adjustment.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.