Talk:Allied Democratic Forces

Overblown Islamism

Several claims about links to Al Shabaab and extremist Islam have slipped in here with dubious or no references. Especially the three back-to-back edits from newly registered and otherwise inactive user Special:Contributions/Popking12 are all based on a hokey-looking blog, and they all insert these claims. Unless there is opposition I will remove or soften these claims. Please review this apparently level-headed overview of the group and its history: Eastern Congo: The ADF-NALU’s Lost Rebellion. They are very explicit in discounting the ADF's Islamism. Keitsist (talk) 16:11, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Well the "level-headed" group is funded by the NED... Sinekonata (talk) 15:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Pre-Jamil ADF

Based on what I've gathered, there seems to be a systematic obfuscation of the ADF's origin and development prior to Jamil Mukulu, and in turn a retroactive rewriting of history (not on Wikipedia per se, but in general). I'm tagging you guys based on some of the history pages' largest contributors.

@Applodion, Tony7444, Keitsist, Gazkthul, Catlemur, Wowzers122

I want to run this with you. I can post all the sources here. Perhaps my leads may allow you to find even more info. DA1 (talk) 02:46, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@DA1 I don't see how I am one of the largest contributors when I've only edited this page once? Also, maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't see a problem with the origin and development prior to Jamil Mukulu. The article says it itself "The ADF was formed as a merger of several rebel factions" what more is needed? Wowzers122 (talk) 04:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

The article is in a problematic shape anyway, but there is no "systematic obfuscation", just a lack of general editor attention. If you feel that stuff is wrong, you can change it based on reliable references. Applodion (talk) 08:45, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@Wowzers122: No need to be annoyed, I'm simply pinging other editors in good faith. And frankly, there aren't any major contributors in the absolute sense, only in the relative sense. So I tagged whoever had the largest edits in case any one is interested in the subject matter.

@Applodion: While this article in question is a little more open-ended. There are spinoff articles (including ADF insurgency) which do seem to make statements in a bolder form—such as "The ADF was formed by Jamil Mukulu, an ultra conservative Ugandan Muslim..."

I will share them here in the next few days. It seems a lot has been written in the past half-a-decade about the group, and it's overriding much of the material we have from the late 90s to the mid 2000s. In summary: Jamil did not personally found ADF. He was not the first leader. The ADF did not start out as an Islamist militant group, and in fact it wasn't even a Muslim militant group, but rather an alliance with multiple factions and objectives in it. This continued into the mid-2000s when Jamil likely actually became the leader. Like most local African militant groups, the ADF devolved into a non-ideological existence, and it's from that vacuum that it slowly developed into a more ideological group but this time pivoting towards a more pro-Muslim direction. DA1 (talk) 13:51, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@DA1: While you are broadly correct, and the ADF insurgency article indeed seems to overplay the religious elements in the early ADF, the group was not "non-ideological" in its early years. Sure, the early ADF was a rebel coalition and included groups like NALU which were completely non-religious, but Prunier and other authors (whose works I have read) make it quite clear that the Mukulu faction assumed a dominant role within the coalition from an early point. Not due to their numbers or strength (they were a small minority in the early ADF), but 1) because they were highly motivated, whereas other groups such as NALU and Amin loyalists were ideologically and motivationally bankrupt, and 2) because the Sudanese government favored Islamists within the rebel factions in support (heck, Sudan even attempted to islamize the LRA, a hardcore Christian apocalyptic force). Accordingly, you are correct that Mukulu and his followers were initially not dominant, but their importance was significant even in the ADF's first years.
Please do not interprete these comments as criticism; as a matter of fact, I would be happy if someone tackles the articles on the ADF and the insurgency to improve them. I just want to caution you against pushing too much into the opposition direction of what the articles currently say, ending up with another skewed view. If you decide to work on the article, I will try to contribute a bit myself, using the sources which I have at my disposal. Applodion (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: Thanks for the reply and clarification. I have the names of the original leaders per multiple sourcing from that era. The Jamil faction likely became dominant due to geography, the northeast is where most Muslims reside. The further south or west you go, the more Christians and animists. The NALU faction wasn't the only one that was non-religious. I wouldn't really put much weight into the claim about Sudan trying to convert the LRA to Islam; people throw the Sudan card on everything, it's comical.

Yes, there's always a semblance of ideology in every African group, usually ethnic and tribal with sprinkles of religion. But what I meant was that they weren't systematically religious the way other Islamist militant groups are. Generally these African militant groups become about plunder, and surviving week to week, and that becomes their primary motive for fighting and pillaging villages and camps. Most industrialized peoples find it hard to figure out, but really humans have done it throughout history and it was a dominant way of life between antiquity and the early middle ages for people in Northeast Europe and Inner Eurasia. DA1 (talk) 15:21, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@DA1: The LRA claim has been confirmed by LRA deserters and Sudanese soldiers, though. In regards to the ADF, I doubt that geography was all that important. The most Islamized areas in Uganda and the Congo were actually dominated by Amin loyalists for a long time, not the ADF. Anyway, you are correct that ideology is not all that important for most African rebel groups, but the ADF was always kind of special - be it through their attempts at state-building in their Congolese camps or the latest development of parts of the ADF joining ISIL.
I think the best course of action is for you to simply adjust the article in the ways you think fitting. We can discuss the details afterwards :-D Applodion (talk) 15:40, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@Applodion: People may have made such testimonies, but that's why I don't really touch those articles. History after all is just claims people repeat over and over until it's fact. Political articles on Wikipedia are a minefield, sometimes it's even hard to insert someone's age or other minute but important details of that sort.

Idi Amin was toppled in 1979. Yoweri Museveni, the president of Uganada, whom the ADF and its precursors formed to fight against, was himself an anti-Idi Amin rebel leader, as was his brother. I'm not downplaying the religious faction at all, their growing prominence over the decades is self-evident. I appreciate the conversation. DA1 (talk) 15:56, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

@DA1: I am well aware of the Amin era and its aftermath, as I have largely written the article on Amin's army, the Uganda Army (1971–1980), whose remnants were involved in most post-Amin rebellions in Uganda on both sides up until the early 2000s. As a matter of fact, Amin loyalist Dusman Sabuni was an early ADF leader. Applodion (talk) 16:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)