Leaders’ performance depends on their intentions

In the last two articles I have contrasted General Museveni’s performance with South Korea’s General Park and Vietnam military leadership. South Korea and Vietnam have done well under their military leaders whereas Uganda has done very poorly under the military leadership of General Museveni.

I have concluded that it is leadership – not resource endowments, external factors or “Acts of God” – that makes the difference in development. In this message, I will go a step further to show with reference to General Park and General Museveni that it is leaders’ intentions or what they plan to achieve that define their performance and determine outcomes.

I am making this contribution so that Ugandans and our friends understand why Museveni despite his rhetoric to modernize Uganda, has produced opposite outcomes which he is not attempting to correct because they fit into his intentions.

Uganda is not progressing but regressing. Uganda is a failed state wherever you turn and is drifting towards a fourth world status.

How else do you explain the reemergence of diseases that had long disappeared? How else do you explain rising maternal mortality and insanity due to food insecurity and stress and how else do you explain rapid economic growth reaching 10 percent in the mid-1990s coexisting with two-thirds of Ugandans trapped in absolute poverty, etc?

Leadership change and rapid socioeconomic development in Vietnam

On November 18, 2011 I published an article titled “It is leadership that counts” in the development process. I contrasted performance of two dictators: General Park of South Korea and General Museveni of Uganda.

General Park developed the economy and society pulling them out of poverty to prosperity and laying the foundation for sustained development.

By contrast, General Museveni has sunk his country and society into deeper poverty even when Uganda was relatively better endowed in 1986 when Museveni came to power than South Korea when Park came to power in 1961.

Based on this presentation I have concluded that Uganda will continue to sink into poverty unless Museveni and NRM leadership is removed and the sooner the better.

Those who are currently benefitting from NRM do not seem to realize that these are temporary gains – especially by those paid in intelligence services at home and abroad to hunt down their compatriots – which they will lose if they fail to allow leadership changes that may save them or their children in the days ahead.

It is leadership that counts

In search for solutions to Uganda’s daunting development challenges, I have studied, read and consulted widely in time and space to draw some lessons. I have examined the role of politics and economics, the role of ideologies (capitalism and socialism), the role of democratic and authoritarian leaders and the role of civilian and military leaders etc in the development process.

In economics we were taught that a country’s development would depend on the abundance of the factors of production – abundant labor, abundant fertile land and abundant capital in the form of roads, railways, harbors, machines, telephones and computers etc. Countries that were well endowed would do better than those that were less endowed.

On this basis alone, Uganda being more endowed than Kenya, Ugandans would be ahead of Kenyans in economic growth, transformation and social development. We know this is not the case, at least in terms of life expectancy and trade benefits within East Africa.

North Korea took more natural resources and industries than South Korea at the time of partition but see where South Korea is compared to North in levels of economic growth, transformation and standard of living.

What makes resistance succeed and lessons for Uganda

For resistance to succeed there has to be a national mission or rallying cry supported by the opposition. Here are a few examples.

1. The mission of the Cuban revolution was to free Cubans from exploitation, poverty and repression. The mission had popular support because most Cubans were exploited through poor pay and appalling living conditions including those who worked on tobacco and sugar cane farms. The mission resonated with peasants who joined the war or provided support in other ways. Many more were inspired to join the struggle after they witnessed the savage reprisal meted out by the Batista regime. Charismatic leadership and strict discipline of guerrillas were also crucial.

2. The mission of the Vietnam War guerrillas was to give land, rice and clothes to the people in South Vietnam who were very poor. The peasants rallied behind the Viet Cong guerrillas in large numbers because they supported the mission. Many more joined later because they resented forced resettlement in “strategic hamlets” which they felt denied them their liberty. Whole communities were involved in supporting the guerrillas.

Uganda’s democracy won’t be won at gun point

The year 2011 will go down as a defining moment in Uganda’s political economy history. Those who have followed political debates since before independence in 1962 will agree that this year has been exceptional in this regard. The services provided particularly by radio munansi and Ugandans at Heart Forum that have facilitated exchange of information and debate are highly commendable. They facilitated the birth of United Democratic Ugandans (UDU) – an umbrella organization that has brought together parties and organizations opposed to the NRM system to coordinate their activities and speak with one voice.

Uganda has entered the age of Enlightenment based on the concept of reason, not swallowing orders from the military dictator lock, stock and barrel. The debates on oil and Mabira forest are some examples of this Age of Enlightenment. And there is no turning back.

The people of Uganda are thus demanding to start from a clean slate. They want to develop their future path and occupy the driver’s seat with external helping hand as appropriate. The preparation of the National Recovery Plan (NRP) by Ugandans is a concrete example of what we mean.

“We need to guard against ethnic polarization” – Nuwagaba

Vincent Nuwagaba has written a useful article on the above subject. It is an article written in simple language, yet substantive – by someone with sufficient knowledge and experience in Uganda’s political economy. The timing of its publication could not have been better – coming so soon after the London conference.

It is true that some westerners have criticized Museveni regime constantly. And I am one of them. The idea really is not to make him uncomfortable but to draw mistakes of his government to his attention so that corrective actions are taken. I believe that is how he has received our messages.

I was forced to write an article about how Bairu of Rukungiri district got impoverished to demonstrate that western Uganda has some of the poorest people in Uganda. Some are committing suicide because they cannot raise tax money. Many are selling land to make ends meet and have ended up landless.

Subsequently a journalist from Canada visited Rukungiri district and wrote an article that was more disturbing in the depth of poverty, dispossession and marginalization than I had written. Yet many Ugandans continue to believe that all westerners are filthy rich. This is entirely wrong.

Ugandans need patience, honesty, optimism and constructive engagement

The massive rigging of 2011 elections has forced many Ugandans to conclude that NRM won’t be unseated through the ballot box. They have decided to put elections on hold until the playing field has been leveled after NRM is gone. To unseat NRM other means have to be applied. Consequently, Ugandans in the opposition are trying to find a common ground on the purpose and how to implement it.

Given Uganda’s history of divide and rule, north-south divide, master-servant relations, differences in religion, economic and political injustice, different cultures and personal ambitions, it is taking longer to establish a common platform and methods of engagement.

Thus we still have people in our midst who believe that without them in the lead nothing will get done. When they do not lead, they do what it takes to frustrate the efforts of others.

We still have in our midst some who believe that they were born to rule and others to labor for them. When those believed to be servants rise to leadership positions they are frustrated by those who think that God ordained them divine leaders, only answerable to Him.

Post-London conference philosophy should be fundamentally different from NRM’s

NRM came to power at the height of the Washington Consensus ideology based on market forces, laissez-faire capitalism, economic deregulation, macroeconomic stability and trickle down mechanism, etc. Government was seen as part of the development problem and not the solution.

In 1997 the Washington Consensus was declared over at the G20 Summit in London. Since then the economically troubled world with high unemployment and slow economic growth has been influenced largely by a return of Keynesian model of demand management. Governments have returned to stimulate the economy working strategically in partnership with the private sector and civil societies and addressing imperfections of the market mechanism including deregulation.

Although NRM government abandoned the Washington Consensus or Structural Adjustment in late 1997 and replaced it with a five-year development plan, implying an active but strategic role of the government in the economy, in practice the government has continued to implement many of the Washington Consensus elements.

Unity underscored at the London conference

Preliminary reports coming out of London indicate that the Uganda conference on November 12, 2011 was well attended and interactive. That NRM attended the conference is commendable. It appears though that the agenda was tilted towards political aspects related to the NRM regime perhaps as a result of participants’ profiles. A contribution to the conference on the National Recovery Plan (NRP) is available at www.udugandans.org.

Understanding where we are in Uganda is a historical and multi-sector process that needs to take into account political, economic, social and regional aspects that have contributed to the present impasse. Political conflict is by and large a reflection of economic and social inequities that undermine liberty, justice and dignity.

We hope that this is the first meeting in a series of others to follow. A report of the meeting with a clear message on outcomes and follow-up actions made available to the public will be helpful.

Those who deny that Uganda is not at a crossroads need to reexamine the basis for drawing that conclusion. Uganda is in real trouble politically, economically, socially, morally and environmentally. The long-term intentions of current leaders need to be understood clearly as a pre-requisite for finding solutions.

Converting part of great lakes region into Tutsi Empire

On November 12, 2011 political parties and organizations met in London to discuss Uganda under the theme: “Uganda at Cross-Roads: Which Way Forward?”

I had planned to attend the conference but was not able to get a visa because of a time constraint. I prepared a statement on the National Recovery Plan (NRP) as an alternative to the failed policies of NRM government. I submitted it to the organizers for their necessary action. The full statement is available at www.udugandans.org.

I had also planned to make an oral presentation on the impact of the silent pursuit of Tutsi Empire on Uganda’s future. Museveni has championed the idea for a long time disguised as East African federation, going as far back as his Ntare School days in the early 1960s. Museveni has worked on this project silently, methodically and incrementally, starting with capture of power in Uganda and using it to extend his imperial tentacles.

We are in the age of enlightenment and can no longer take things at face value regardless of the source – reason has become order of the day. Thus, to understand Museveni’s mind one needs to reason dialectically, by looking at and exposing that which is not said but done.