Has Museveni’s bad governance of Uganda been deliberate?

Wherever you look – economic equitability, food and nutrition security, quality education and healthcare and biodiversity protection etc – you see deficits. That is why even those at the UN, BWIs (World Bank and IMF) and bilateral partners are quietly distancing themselves from Museveni’s development failure and ruthless dictatorship.

Museveni came to power at a time when Uganda was ready for positive change. Ugandans wanted change that would help all of them put food on the table, send their children to school, find remunerative and decent jobs, move out of subsistence economy, enjoy healthy lives, good neighborly relations and protect their lives and properties earned intellectually (an article posted on the internet for example) or through physical labor etc.

Britain has caused too much trouble and suffering in Uganda

Since John Hanning Speke (later described as a patronizing and incompetent man who wrote detailed reports on unfamiliar terrain {H. Hanbury-Tenison 2010}) set foot on what later became Uganda in mid-19th century, Britain has caused too much trouble and suffering to the people of Uganda because of its biased racial, economic, military, ethnic, refugee and political approaches. The following are illustrative highlights of British biased actions.

A message to voters in Rujumbura constituency

Next month (February 2011) you will exercise your right and elect a president, a member of parliament and district councilors for the next five years. The purpose of elections is to choose people that will represent the interests of all the people in their respective constituencies through for example building schools (and providing school lunches), hospitals and clinics, constructing roads, providing affordable energy, improving agriculture, storage and processing facilities. Representatives should implement development promises they make during campaigning time. When a representative does not deliver as promised he/she should not be re-elected.

Like other constituencies in Uganda, Rujumbura has had elections since 1961. For most of the time (some 95 percent) Rujumbura has been represented in parliament by Bashambo clan of Bahororo people.

By way of background information, Bahororo are Batutsi from Rwanda (not Bahima as previously thought. There are no Bahima in Rujumbura) who came to Rujumbura around 1800 as refugees when Bahima overran their short-lived Mpororo kingdom (after it had disintegrated) in present-day Ntungamo district. In collaboration with Arab slave traders who came with superior European weapons, Bahororo managed to defeat and enslave, exploit and marginalize Bantu people they found in the area. Bantu people who were dubbed Bairu (which means slaves) lost their short horn cattle and industrial enterprises. They were reduced to cultivators growing food for and providing free labor to the new masters in a master/serf relationship as existed in pre-colonial Rwanda and medieval Europe. Punishments were severe to prevent rebellions or when they occurred.

Why Museveni is not trusted as leader of Uganda

There are good and bad leaders. Good leaders have characteristics including persuasion that make them popular and eliminate resort to force. Leadership qualities – good or bad – are detected early in one’s life. A good leader even among children persuades, a bad one bullies. Good leaders are trusted and are well known in their communities and therefore popular. When they arrive in a village all people are eager to meet and welcome them. Bad leaders lead to debates about who should meet them because none likes them even many of those working for them.

Throughout his school days, Museveni did not exhibit qualities (intellectual and social etc) that would qualify him as a good leader. And people who know him very well including some of his teachers will tell you that Museveni was driven into politics by the desire to dominate others not to serve the interest of the general public. He wanted to dominate by impoverishing or marginalizing subjects as we have witnessed over the last 25 years of his rule. This conclusion and his actions together with uncertainties surrounding his place of birth have made Ugandans to judge Museveni as unpopular and a poor leader. That is why he has gained positions by default and/or through rigging elections (EIR 1997 and John F. Clark (2002). Consequently, Museveni has failed to win the hearts of Ugandans for the following illustrative reasons.

Bahororo women are destroying Bairu nation

Readers who are not used to this kind of exchange might be disturbed. However, if you have an open mind you will overcome it once you understand the tricks Bahororo are using to keep Bairu down and by extension the rest of Uganda. I know there are some Bairu who will object to this kind of conversation in large part because they are benefiting from Museveni regime and do not want trouble.

The primary objective of writing this and other stories is not to make friends (it will be good if that happens) but to share my research findings with a wider public. I have tried to be as factual and as balanced as possible because I know that any story about the relationship between Bahororo and Bairu is bound to be controversial and emotional. If you do not agree challenge me with facts and not emotions. We are not going to let a whole nation be destroyed because we do not want to upset a few people.

Why has Museveni’s birth place issue resurfaced?

Without realizing it, Uganda has entered two somewhat related phases: the enlightenment phase and the dialectics phase. The enlightenment phase involves reasoning: asking questions and demanding convincing answers. The dialectics phase means that Ugandans are scrutinizing Museveni statements like never before to demonstrate that the truth of his intentions is in that he does not say. In other words, Ugandans are trying to make the absent the present because the greater part of the truth is in that which is absent.

Based on his actions during and since the guerrilla war a rapidly increasing number of Ugandans have concluded that Museveni is a foreigner whose intentions are to marginalize indigenous Ugandans economically, demographically and politically working in close cooperation with foreigners especially Britain, Uganda’s neocolonial master.

The following harsh actions (some of them repeated for easy reference) taken by Museveni are used as illustrations that only a foreigner can impose on a people he does not belong to.