Abstract

There have been widespread reports of elephant poaching by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) in Garamba National Park (GNP) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), presenting a narrative that ivory poaching funds terror and that both can be solved by the same (military) intervention. This narrative distorts the complex dynamics. It identifies clear villains, edits out other poaching actors, and legitimises particular interventions. Poaching is portrayed as a moral, non-political issue and military intervention is portrayed as a logical outcome. The wider history and current context are neglected. The LRA's poaching threat, relative to other actors, is overemphasised. It ignores how the LRA poaching—real as it was—fits into a history of poaching caused by problems with state capacity and territorial control, including incursions by armed actors. The situation demands solutions that are more complex than merely defeating the LRA. More so, military intervention against the LRA has worsened poaching, due to state military implications in poaching. The article shows how the 'LRA ivory–terrorism' narrative is a discursive tool for particular agendas, which primarily allow particular interventions, legitimisation of resources, or wider readership. In this way, the actors involved create their own echo-chamber, which is less concerned with local dynamics and which does not include practical conservation actors in Garamba. The narrative has also begun to shift.

Highlights

  • There have been widespread reports of elephant poaching by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Garamba National Park (GNP) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), presenting a narrative that ivory poaching funds terror and that both can be solved by the same intervention

  • We look at the way in which the LRA ivory–terrorism link was framed in advocacy and media reports

  • The LRA ivory–terrorism narrative can be described in similar terms through the process of de-contextualising, in which ivory poaching is reduced to the LRA and directly linked to terrorism

Read more

Summary

INTRODUCTION

“Case proven: ivory trafficking funds terrorism” ran the headline in The Guardian (Kahumbwith and Halliday 2015). This helps to explain the narrative’s delayed arrival—while the LRA had been poaching elephants since its arrival in Garamba in 2006, it was only in 2013 that reporting on this issue began Others went further, arguing that “Congress only did what they did because of the advocacy groups.” By linking terror and poaching around the LRA, these organisations tapped into a second US priority—in mid-2013, President Obama had signed an executive order to combat wildlife trafficking, presenting it as a global security threat (Goldenberg 2013b). The narrative lives in an echo-chamber, which is less concerned with local dynamics.

CONCLUSIONS
Interview with expert
Findings
21 Its last large-scale attacks were in 2008 and 2009
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call