ABSTRACT
This chapter considers the methodological journey we undertook when studying how members of the Congolese army (Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC)) understand and reflect on their experiences with external defence reform interventions.1 Drawing heavily on post-colonial theory and on insights gleaned from theories of governmentality, we sought to make sense of how staff in the FARDC see themselves as agents who ‘own’ (or disown) the processes of (re)formation (Eriksson Baaz and Stern, 2014). Studies on security sector reform (SSR) in African states abound. In addi-
tion to policy-oriented scholarship assessing the successes, failures and challenges of SSR (cf. Sedra 2010), there is a growing body of scholarship that critically appraises external interventions that are aimed at prompting and assisting so-called ‘failed states’ in engaging in state-building reforms that will ensure ‘good governance’ (see for example, Abrahamsen, 2000, 2004; Chandler, 2010; Chesterman, 2010). Critical scholarship focusing on security governance explores external actors’ (such as the European Union (EU), the United Nations (UN), as well as individual state actors) engagement in SSR and security-development efforts more generally as key techniques of governing these ‘failed states’ (Abrahamsen and Williams, 2011; Duffield, 2007; Chesterman, 2010; Krahmann 2003). Little attention, however, is paid to how those who are to be reformed react to the efforts to reform them. Put in more theoretical terms, there is a dearth of studies that focus on the processes of subjectivation to security governance through SSR efforts (whereby the state security agents are governed – in part – through external engagement). As Chapter 1 of this book has laid out, processes of subjectivation do not
easily lend themselves to being studied through the methods and methodologies that are readily available to us. In our case, we grappled with how we could study the intricate relationships of the disciplining technologies at play in the myriad discourses that inform defence reform and are productive of the subjects of this reform. Importantly, we wondered how we could identify and query the agency of these subjects – subjects who clearly surpass the confines
of the limits of the subject positions allotted them in these reform discourses/ practices. Furthermore, how were we, as researcher subjects (see Higate, this volume), produced through different technologies and techniques of government, and why/how did that matter in terms of the ‘results’ of our research endeavour, as well as the ethico-political responsibility we assume. In this chapter, we explore these challenges and how we handle them. First,
we briefly introduce the puzzle that guides our research: governing security through defence reform in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Next, we highlight some of the challenges we face in conducting our research. We first reflect on how we asked questions in the interview settings. Here we discuss our point of departure, as well as the stances of politeness and provocation/indignation as modes for creating/expressing spaces for agency. We then consider how we analysed our interview material. We discuss our strategies of noticing instances of: resonance and pride; discord and translation; resonance and resistance; resonance and ambivalence; and narratives of victimcy. We conclude with a brief discussion of the limits of our analysis and ourselves as governed/governing. Why did we choose to focus on security governance and the Congolese
armed forces? This research project rests on previous research on gender and military identities within the Congolese armed forces, conducted between 2006 and 2010 (Eriksson Baaz and Stern, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013a, 2013b). Our impetus for studying army staff soldiers’ experiences of external defence reform initiatives arose out of this previous research. Many soldiers whom we interviewed spoke about participating in training exercises, where they received ‘human rights and gender’ training, which was designed to thwart the occurrence of sexual violence. Their testimonies relayed, among other things, a sense of insult that they were treated as if they lacked any ethical compass, as well as the inappropriateness of the content of the training sessions for preventing sexual violence. While our research indicated that reform of the Congolese national armed forces is sorely needed if violence against civilians is to be mitigated (and even stopped), it was also clear that external security governance interventions in the form of different defence reform efforts demand careful scrutiny. In this chapter we focus on the FARDC members as the (self-governing)
subjects of the governing techniques and technologies of (external) defence reform.2 Clearly, these subjects (the FARDC) are also agents who govern the Congolese population through (often violent) security techniques and technologies. These latter relationships and subjectivities, however, are not the focus of this particular study (c.f. Eriksson Baaz and Stern, 2008, 2009).
