In Uganda minority has dominated majority through the barrel of the gun

Ugandans and development partners searching for a lasting solution to endemic problems in Uganda need to revisit the country’s history for some clues. Under normal circumstances it is the majority that dominates the minority. In Uganda it is the reverse. And that is why democracy and elections which express the will of the majority have not worked because the privileged minority has sabotaged the democratic process.

In pre-colonial times the movement and interaction of people – the so-called agriculturalists and pastoralists – produced two communities. The agriculturalists known as Bantu people entered Uganda from the west. Their economic activities were dominated by crops and livestock (goats, sheep and short horn cattle) and poultry and manufactured products using abundant resources including iron ore and timber. Because they settled in large areas with fertile land, good weather and plenty of wild game and fruits and vegetables they multiplied quickly. Because there was plenty of everything including foodstuffs that increased resistance against diseases, there was no cause for conflict and wars. Absence of war minimized mortality and also contributed to rapid population growth. When conflicts arose, some communities simply moved away or the disputes were solved by diplomatic means through negotiations. Accordingly Bantu people did not have standing armies for offensive or defensive purposes.

The pastoralists known as Nilotic people entered Uganda from the north. They lived in areas characterized by hostile environment that translated into shortages of pasture and water. In order to survive they became nomadic fighters most of the time to access adequate pasture and water for their livestock or to restock after epidemics decimated their herds. Frequent wars and other constraints kept their numbers small. Consequently, to survive pastoralists became warriors.

When these warrior pastoralists entered Uganda two distinct developments took place. First, pastoralists in northern and eastern parts, in Buganda, Bunyoro and Toro mixed comprehensively and produced new communities obliterating the pastoralist and agriculturalist dichotomy. The rulers in Buganda and Bunyoro encouraged mixed marriages and kings and chiefs married from different clans.

Second, in Southwest Uganda particularly in Ankole and Rujumbura of Rukungiri district, the Nilotic pastoralist warriors (who took on the names of Bahima and Batutsi/Bahororo) decided against intermarriage with Bantu – the agricultural people. They decided to dominate and rob them of their wealth using their warrior experience and convert them into slaves. Until then Bantu people were known by their clan names. Pastoralists introduced a new name of Bairu (slaves or servants) which was applied to all agricultural Bantu people. Through collaboration with slave traders and access to European weapons, the pastoralists consolidated their power over majority agriculturalists. The latter were deprived of their short horn cattle (a source of protein, store of wealth, symbol of prestige and means of getting a wife) and were reduced to laboring for the new masters in return for so-called protection. Any Mwiru (singular for Bairu) who caused ‘trouble’ by demanding restoration of his rights and freedoms was got rid of or compromised by getting a Muhima or Muhororo woman as a wife and absorbed into Nilotic society as a junior partner. Through these arrangements Bairu people were denied leadership to wage a liberation struggle. This practice of compromising Bairu men still exists through social, political and economic arrangements.

The dominating relationship between minority Nilotic pastoralists (Bahima and Batutsi/Bahororo) and majority Bairu agriculturalists was extended into Rwanda and Burundi where minority Nilotic Batutsi pastoralists have dominated majority Bahutu agriculturalists to this day.

The beginning of colonial rule in Uganda was marked by religious wars among Protestants, Catholics and Muslims. With help of Captain Lugard and modern weapons, minority Protestants defeated the combined majority Catholics and Muslims. Colonial administration relied on minority Protestants through the indirect rule system. In southwest Uganda (Ankole and Rujumbura) Nilotic Bahima and Batutsi/Bahororo were employed as chiefs and perfected their squeeze on Bairu people. The Askaris (policemen) with guns were hired to maintain law and order (or silence dissent) and maximize exploitation of Bairu through taxes, free labor and tribute in food and drinks to chiefs who were also salaried civil servants. The chiefs’ children went to school paid for by Bairu labor that raised tax money some of which paid chiefs’ salaries used as school fees for their children while Bairu children stayed at home. This explains in part why kingdoms in southwest Uganda are very unpopular. All chiefs or most of them converted to the Protestant faith.

The exploited Bairu and Catholic majority looked forward to breaking the chains of bondage as colonial administrative reforms were introduced including in the composition of the legislative council (Legco) through direct elections based on majority rule. This hope was dashed in Ankole and Buganda that rejected direct elections. In Ankole Bahima or their collaborators were indirectly elected to Legco. They represented Ankole at the constitutional conference in London in preparation for independence. Their main preoccupation was retention of kingship and its privileges in independent Uganda. The UPC and KY alliance of strange bedfellows (monarchists and commoners) was designed purely to protect the minority Protestants against majority Catholics.

However the voice of majority Bairu in Ankole and Rujumbura could not be suppressed any longer. The Nilotic pastoralists (Bahima and Batutsi/Bahororo) realized that they could not hold onto power by democratic means because their minority numbers disadvantaged them. Under the leadership of Museveni they began to collect guns and to undergo vigorous military training to retain power through the barrel of the gun. Preparations to overthrow Amin regime by force gave Museveni an opportunity to hire fighters from his kin and kith (Bahima and Bahororo) mostly from Ankole and Kigezi as well as Tutsi mercenaries from Rwanda and Burundi and elsewhere they resided including those who lived in Uganda as refugees or as laborers who had come to Uganda in search of work from Burundi and Rwanda since the 1920s and were scattered in all parts of Uganda where there is cattle herding. They adopted local names and spoke local languages but men resisted marriage with women in the communities where they have lived up to this day in 2012. Thus, they have retained their Nilotic identity and warrior mentality. One result of this is that Uganda has been ruled since independence by two Protestant Nilotics – Obote and Museveni and one Nubian Muslim – Amin.

The Protestant minority hold on power was broken by Amin’s regime from 1971 to 1979. Under Amin, Muslim minority got a chance to rule Uganda largely through mercenaries hired from DRC and Sudan because their numbers are very small.

Protestant Museveni’s ambitions drove him from controlling Bairu in Ankole and Rujumbura to taking over the whole country under minority Protestant Bahororo domination. He appealed to disgruntled Catholics to join his forces apparently with a promise that Catholics or DP would assume leadership of Uganda upon defeat of Obote. The promise has yet to be fulfilled if it was made at all. The dispute between Acholi and Langi in the Uganda army resulted in a coup against Obote in 1985, opening the door for Museveni to capture power in 1986.

There are stories – true or not – that since Museveni came to power he has feared the Acholi fighters and Baganda numbers with sizeable Catholic followers. It is believed rightly or wrongly that the northern war was deliberately prolonged to break the back of the Acholi people and end potential threat from that corner. The war ended with active external intervention. Developments in Buganda such as creation of small kingdoms within a kingdom, Greater Kampala and land grabbing seem to suggest according to some commentators that Museveni is working methodically and indirectly to break the back of Baganda using largely some so-called Baganda agents who speak Luganda language and use Luganda names but are not indigenous Baganda. True or not these stories are everywhere and Ugandans are demanding to know the family tree of present and future leaders. If Museveni is not stopped and his fifty year master plan for domination of Uganda by minority Protestant Bahororo succeeds Uganda may be plunged into a crisis because the eyes of the majority of Ugandans who have been exploited for centuries have been opened up.

Ugandans and others who believe in peace, security and happiness for all men and women and in prevention through dialogue this is the time to act. The media in Uganda and abroad is full of scary stories against the minority ruling class reminiscent of what preceded Rwanda genocide in 1994. This and other stories before it have been written with all the risks involved because the authors want to save lives. The minority group that believes in using the gun to continue to rule the majority needs to think again. Corrupting current and potential leaders at home and abroad with cash, jobs, awards and other social arrangements will only serve as a temporary arrangement. Times have changed, eyes have been opened and social injustice has been felt more than ever before especially at this time of economic hardship for the majority against abundance for the minority. A win-win philosophy should replace the zero-sum game ideology without further delay. We call upon our development partners to extend a helping hand in finding a lasting solution to the current minority over majority dominance struggle that has infected the Great Lakes region from Uganda to DRC through Rwanda.