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.
1. John Hanning Speke, British explorer, visited what later became Uganda at the height of race science in Europe that placed white people at the top and black (Negro) people at the bottom of the civilization pyramid. Blacks in Africa were considered to have no civilization because they were not intelligent. Consequently Africa was regarded a “Dark Continent” and darkness is not a subject of history so no European bothered to find out. Therefore Africa had no civilization and history. When Speke arrived in Uganda he was amazed by the sophisticated civilizations he found especially in Buganda, a Bantu or black kingdom. Since blacks were considered unintelligent and had no civilization Speke reasoned and concluded that the civilizations in Uganda must be the work of white people. He looked around for people who might resemble Europeans physically. The closest he could find were Bahima. Speke therefore developed the Hamitic Theory – a myth that Bahima, Batutsi and Bahororo are white people. In order to link Bahima to Europe Speke created a story that they entered Uganda from Ethiopia – and Ethiopia had connections with Europe through the Middle East. Harry Johnston first British administrator to Uganda picked up Speke’s story and embellished it. Subsequent studies and tests have demonstrated that Bahima, Batutsi and Bahororo are black people and actually darker than Bantu people. Their origin before they entered Uganda and the great lakes region has been traced to Bahr el Ghazal in southern Sudan and are ethnically Nilotic Luo-speaking people. There is no linguistic or cultural linkage between Bahima and Ethiopians. Bahima resemble Dinkas and not Ethiopians – Ethiopians are relatively short people. It has also been established that civilizations in Uganda were developed by Bantu (Bachwezi were responsible for some of these civilizations including the magnificent earthen works in central Uganda such as Bigo. Bachwezi were a Bantu aristocracy) people. In spite of these scientific findings, Bahima, Batutsi and Bahororo have continued to deceive themselves that they are white people, more intelligent, superior and born to rule over others. Britain since colonial days has supported Bahororo from Makobore in Rujumbura to Mbaguta in Ankole to Museveni in Uganda today. Museveni’s poor and dictatorial leadership of Uganda for the last 25 years does not support the theory that Bahororo are born to rule (perhaps they are born to rule badly no matter western cosmetic support). It is appropriate to say that Bahororo are born to destroy if we go by Makobore and Muhwezi’s rule in Rujumbura and Museveni’s record in Uganda.
2. Captain Lugard hired Nubian mercenaries in his destructive war against Bunyoro resistance to colonial rule and subsequent loss of large territory. Bunyoro population has not reached in 2011 pre-colonial level because of British colonial war. Britain later used Nubians under Amin (Nubian) to overthrow an elected government of Obote in 1971. Bob Astles is believed to have run Uganda during Amin who was supported by Britain until he was overthrown by Tanzanian troops and Uganda rebels in 1979. Britain then supported the rise of Museveni, brought him to power and has sustained him there since 1986 by both conservative and labor governments. Amin and Museveni have caused untold suffering to the people of Uganda through wars, economic mismanagement and abuse of human rights. Linda Chalker like Bob Astles before her has been the invisible hand (mis)guiding Museveni since 1986.
3. Economically, Britain decided which areas would be economic growth centers and labor reserves. Buganda served as former and the rest of the country as latter. Labor reserve areas were prevented from growing cash crops and wages were set so low that male workers had to trek to Buganda to earn tax money. In the absence of motorized transport male workers walked long distances through hostile territory including wild animals such as lions that mauled many men. Uganda regions have developed unequally economically since that time. Since 1987 Britain has played a principal role in structural adjustment that has tied Uganda to the export of raw materials, de-industrialization and macroeconomic policies that have destroyed Uganda socially and environmentally. Environmental degradation in urban and rural areas has become very serious. Marginalization of social sectors of education, healthcare and housing has resulted in resurfacing and spreading diseases of poverty such as jiggers and scabies etc that can no longer be hidden under low inflation, economic growth and per capita income figures that western powers have used to deceive Museveni that he was a ‘star performer’ in order to continue to use him in their regional geopolitical matters.
4. To get cheap labor, Britain developed a liberal immigration policy that attracted workers from neighboring countries particularly Rwanda, Burundi and Kenya. Most of these workers settled permanently and have caused disturbing demographic and ethnic changes. In 1970 Obote chased away Kenyan workers to create room for Uganda workers. This decision created problems with Kenya and Amin used it as one of the reasons for staging a military coup against Obote in 1971 which had strong British backing. Obote’s attempts to return Rwanda Tutsi refugees back to their country in the early 1980s resulted in international condemnation by those who wanted to remove him from power including Britain because he was considered a socialist. Tutsi refugees in Uganda joined Museveni in a destructive guerrilla war that was funded, marketed and guided by Britain (Tiny Rowland, William Pike and Linda Chalker). Museveni has continued to be guided or as some think directed by Britain since 1986 (British economists in the ministry of finance, planning and economic development led by Paul Collier and DFID (Department for International Development).
5. Britain decided that security forces (police, army and prisons) must come from the north. Since northerners are generally taller than southerners, Britain set a height requirement that discriminated against shorter Bantu people in the south. Until 1986, the northern region monopolized the instruments of force which terrorized the people of Uganda in the 1960s and mostly in the 1970s during the Amin regime. Since the 1980s Britain felt it needed a change. The height requirement was dropped and Britain started building forces from the south led by Museveni, a man that had been identified to be Britain’s surrogate in her great lakes geopolitics. To build his military and political base Museveni was allowed to spend a lot of money on security forces beyond the agreed target under structural adjustment and to postpone multiparty politics which was a requirement for continued foreign aid in other countries (Journal of Democracy April 1998).
6. Britain is responsible for the intensification or creation of ethnic or tribal groups that have torn the country apart. Britain favored sub-nationalism. Indirect rule tampered with ethnic boundaries and organized people into tribal units. Educated Ugandans were encouraged to work in their local governments an arrangement that worked against national consciousness and patriotism till today. Museveni has followed this policy of ethnic divisions by creating over 100 tiny economically unviable districts along tribal lines with British acquiesce.
7. Britain’s liberal refugee policy has caused tremendous difficulties for Uganda. Because Britain had set the date for Uganda’s independence in 1962, it did not want the influx of Tutsi refugees from Rwanda to complicate final preparations by keeping refugees in camps that would attract world attention. British authorities agreed that Tutsi refugees and their cattle should settle with relatives or drift in the country and settle where they found space in Uganda. After independence other refugees from Congo, Sudan, Kenya and Somalia have been treated the same. This random mobility and land occupation are at the heart of economic, land, ethnic and political problems particularly in Buganda and western region. Museveni’s liberal policy has intensified immigration problems so much that Uganda could easily end up like Ivory Coast.
8. Britain’s hand has also been detected in Uganda politics. There is evidence that Britain working with Kabaka and Obote prevented Kiwanuka from becoming prime minister at independence because he was Catholic. Obote’s removal from power in 1971 and 1985 had a British hand as well. The rise to power of Lule and Museveni had the blessing and guidance of Britain. It is alleged that the Mambas that terrorized Besigye and his supporters in the 2001 elections were funded by Britain. As noted already, Museveni has had massive support from Britain. In return Museveni has handed over Uganda economy and its management to Britain. Consequently Uganda is a neo-colony of Britain. What is remaining is handing over Uganda land to Britain. And this could easily happen through Paul Collier’s advice for large scale farms using expensive modern inputs beyond the reach of Uganda peasants meaning that foreign farmers with resources and expertise would be allocated peasant land.
9. Based on the above illustrations Britain cannot escape responsibility and blame for problems and suffering of Uganda people since colonial days. If this trajectory continues, Uganda may be forced to embark on a second phase of the liberation struggle.