Monthly Archives: April 2012

In Uganda religious leaders can make a difference

Our doctrine is that Ugandans will liberate themselves from Museveni’s military dictatorship and the NRM failed system via a wide range of instruments including mass media and collaboration with religious leaders. The international community is called upon to level the playing field as Ugandans embark on a journey to freedom through peaceful demonstrations which are an integral part of our human rights including the right to self-determination and crafting a governance system that accommodates specific interests. That the European Union and Commonwealth observer teams concluded that the February 18, 2011 presidential and parliamentary elections were ‘not free and fair’ is a commendable beginning.

From time immemorial religious leaders have played a vital role (and some of them paid a heavy price) in easing the suffering of people meted out by their leaders. For example, John Ball a follower of John Wycliffe contributed tremendously through speeches and writing (e.g. “All men by Nature Were Created Alike”) in support of English peasants that had suffered exploitation. The peasants revolted in 1381 resulted in the abolition of the poll tax imposed in 1380 which sparked the great revolt.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda has failed because of lack of tested leaders

Uganda has everything except good, dedicated, tested and patriotic leaders. When someone suddenly jumps out of a ‘corn field’ onto a political stage and then quickly becomes head of state chances are that that country will experience tremendous difficulties.

Look at Uganda since independence in 1962. Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and Kabaka-Yekka (KY) political parties were formed virtually on the eve of independence, allowing no time to test the leaders. The UPC/KY alliance was a marriage of convenience – not of conviction to unite and lead Uganda to greatness. The alliance was hurriedly put together for the sole purpose of preventing Democratic Party (DP) from forming a government at independence. In this rush thorny issues like the head of state and ‘lost counties’ which could have prevented formation of a UPC/KY alliance were not resolved before independence. The rush gave us a complex constitution with serious repercussions. What happened after independence did not surprise those who followed the negotiations in London or who knew the ideological differences between UPC and KY leaders. We ended up with 1966 catastrophe, a pigeon-hole constitution and Amin in 1971.

Read the full post
Posted on by

The primacy of nonviolence in Uganda’s regime change should remain our focus

I want to thank commentators on my two articles that appeared in Ugandans at Heart website last week and are still being discussed including on the radio. Exchange of views in a substantive way is a very important first step towards finding a right path to unseat NRM regime. The discussions so far have been civil in tone and hope they will continue that way.

In the two articles an attempt has been made to demonstrate that we should – in the first instance – use nonviolent means to unseat NRM regime (other options are not ruled out) because they minimize costs, unify diverse people and make it relatively easy to bring about national reconciliation. The destructive and divisive experience of wars in Uganda is still fresh in our minds. Wars should therefore be avoided – not ruled out.

Studies have shown that since 1900 three out of four nonviolent campaigns have succeeded (Chenoweth and Staphan 2011). We know that to succeed Ugandan nonviolent campaigners will need support of neighbors and the rest of the international community through for example reducing financial, technical and diplomatic support to NRM regime and imposing targeted sanctions. We should, however, not expect the international community to send troops to Uganda to unseat NRM government unless a situation similar to Libya’s develops whereby Museveni tries to destroy Uganda citizens by military means as Gadaffi tried to do to Libyans.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Ugandans need to practice what they preach

As a researcher I have interacted with many Ugandans at different social levels. All want children to do better than their parents. All want to be treated with respect. All those opposed to NRM want unity to succeed etc. However, the surprising part is that there are very few people acting individually or collectively through institutions that practice what they preach.

Look at the NRM government. It has preached modernization of agriculture but practiced very little. It has preached industrialization of Uganda but in practice the country is de-industrializing. It has preached environmental protection and sustainable management of natural resources but is threatening to give away a portion of Mabira forest for sugarcane plantation. It has preached good education in quantity and quality but cannot even provide lunches that keep children in primary school and make them perform better especially girls.

In rhetoric many Ugandans – married or not – feel that Uganda’s population is growing fast and needs to be controlled, but very few are willing to practice birth control. They feel their ‘neighbors’ should do so first.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Ours will be a liberal democracy

Liberal democracy has two main components. First, it is based on free and fair elections which are held regularly so that all eligible citizens choose their representatives and form a government. Second, a liberal democracy guarantees that rights for individuals and groups are protected and ipso facto cannot be taken away by government. Put another way, liberal democracy is a form of government that combines representative institutions of government including free and fair elections with liberal values in terms of individual rights and responsibilities.

It is important to stress that it is citizens that vote in a free and fair environment. And government cannot take away inalienable rights and freedoms of citizens.

In writing chapter two of the National Recovery Plan (NRP) which was released to the public for comment last week, United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) committee examined the elections and governments in Uganda since 1961. All of them did not meet the two components of a liberal democracy. Citizen participation in elections and government has been less than satisfactory, elections have not been free and fair, foreigners have been allowed to vote and governments have violated human rights and fundamental freedoms of Uganda citizens.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Report of the Secretary-General

Boston Conference October 8, 2011

Birth and Christening of UDU

Madam Chairperson

Fellow Ugandans

Ladies and gentlemen

I thank you all for attending the first ever United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) conference.

I thank in particular Ugandans in the Boston area. Since the stolen February 18, 2011 presidential and parliamentary elections, the group has championed demonstrations that have taken place in Washington DC, New York City and several times here in Boston. The group participated actively in the Los Angeles conference where the umbrella organization was born and christened United Democratic Ugandans (UDU).

The first chairman of UDU Mr. Mubiru Musoke is from Boston as well as the leader of gender affairs Ms Dorothy Lubowa Stweart. Mr. Joseph Magandazi a UDU committee member who is also from Boston and represents FDC has championed work that has established networks here in the United States and between UDU and FDC.

The Boston group is hosting the first conference of UDU. We thank them for the warm welcome that has been extended to us. Please join me in giving them a round of well deserved applause.

The UDU committee was mandated to:

Read the full post
Posted on by

First UDU post-Boston conference board teleconference

The teleconference took place on October 24, 2011

The primary purpose was to take stock of the decisions and recommendations at the Boston conference of October 8, 2011 and agree on the next steps.

The meeting also adopted the report of the teleconference of October 2, 2011 as presented.

The Boston conference was well attended by participants who travelled from many places and our hosts in Massachusetts. FDC was officially represented and made a statement.

1. The main item for the Boston conference was the National Recovery Plan (NRP). Participants praised the plan for its clarity, substance and recommendations. After extensive interactive discussion the report was adopted as an alternative development model to NRM’s failed policies. At the request of some participants who endorsed the plan but needed more time to submit written comments, the deadline was extended to December 31, 2011.

2. Delegations commended the committee (now board) for excellent work and timely completion of what it was mandated to do and more in a short time of three months during summer vacation season. Extra work included creation of the website, email addresses of board members, the letterhead and diplomatic outreach.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Banyankole are not responsible for the suffering in Uganda

Accusations have increased in frequency and intensity that Banyankole have primary responsibility for the suffering being experienced in Uganda, implying punitive measures when the time comes. There were reports that after the brutal manner in which the demonstrators were handled in Kampala in 2009 by security forces, some people vowed that Banyankole would pay a commensurate price including innocent ones that had nothing to do with the disproportionate use of force. Anybody coming from southwest Uganda has been defined as a Munyankole and some of them have been assaulted. Banyankole are therefore wondering on which side to stand: with a tiny group of rulers from Ankole who are causing the chaos and suffering in Uganda or those who are opposed but have vowed to punish any Munyankole when the time comes.

Warnings have gone out that those who accuse Banyankole either in their individual capacity or as representatives of groups should check their facts first to avoid harming innocent people. Southwest Uganda has a complex history of rulers and ruled and of immigrants especially since the late 1950s who pose as Banyankole or Bakiga. We therefore need to know who is who from southwest Uganda and who is doing what. Without this disaggregated information innocent Banyankole and Bakiga or their properties may end up in trouble for nothing.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Change is coming to Uganda

Change is coming. There is no doubt about that. What is unclear is when and how. Change could come sooner than later as it did in 1979 and 1985 that took the country and new leaders by surprise, calling for preparedness just in case (UDU already has a National Recovery Plan). It could come through violence or peaceful means. Our conclusion that change is coming is based on history lessons and internal dynamics in present day Uganda.

In societies where change has taken place, there was by and large external influence and internal discontent. Regarding external factors, the American Revolution was influenced by the writings of European enlightenment thinkers about liberty, equality, separation of power and Thomas Paine’s advice on independent America. The internal discontent was caused largely by British taxation of Americans without being representation in British parliament. The French Revolution was influenced by European enlightenment writers and French soldiers experience in America’s war of independence which made the Old Regime in their country anachronistic. Internal discontent was generated by the wide gap between the privileged high clergy and nobility who did not pay taxes to the government but taxed commoners for their own use and government revenue. The nobility and the clergy that constituted 3 percent of total population owned 40 percent of total land. The Russian Revolution was impacted by external and internal factors similar to those in France. In Eastern Europe, the influence of Radio Free Europe among others and Gorbachev’s restructuring and openness reforms together with economic failures of socialism generated forces for the 1989 revolutions. Thus, revolutions in America, France, Russia and Eastern Europe were created by external and internal dynamics. What about Uganda?

Read the full post
Posted on by

Let us not start war against NRM government

We know that when a government fails to take responsibility for the welfare of the people, it should be removed from power. In the last 26 years NRM government has failed to deliver basic services. Ugandans have tried to remove it from power through the ballot box without success. And it is not likely to happen in the foreseeable future without term limits and an independent electoral commission. Logically, some Ugandans are reasoning that since the ballot box has failed, we must resort to war. But some Ugandans have said no. This does not mean that those who do not want war are cowards. It means that they are pragmatic. Starting a war against a recognized government regardless of how it came into power will be condemned by the international community and come to the government’s rescue. In fact, NRM would welcome such attack to give it a golden opportunity to arrest real and imagined enemies of the state in the name of national security against terrorists and put them away for good. It would also help NRM divert development resources to war efforts and impoverish Ugandans further without being blamed. So Ugandans eager to fight need to understand fully the environment at home and abroad in which they are operating before definitive actions are taken.

Read the full post
Posted on by