Uganda is waiting for the voice of religious leaders

History shows that religious leaders step forward as representatives of voiceless people when political, economic and social conditions become hard. Parish priests who live and work among the people understand their suffering very well. The priests of Uganda are no exception. During the Christmas sermons in 2011, religious leaders throughout the nation spoke out against the suffering of the majority of their flocks. They pledged to speak out in the following years until human conditions improved. The public welcomed this resolution and is waiting to hear their voices that haven’t been loud enough thus far.

During medieval Europe, there was much suffering of serfs or peasants. Priests led in the struggle to liberate them. Priest John Ball together with peasant Wat Tyler led the English peasant revolt in 1381. The authorities were forced to cancel the poll tax.

During the colonization of Latin America, there was too much suffering of indigenous people. Priest de Las Casas stepped forward and protested on their behalf. During the French Revolution parish priest Abe Sieyes wrote and spoke on behalf of the Third Estate that represented the commoners who had been exploited and blocked in their efforts to progress for a long time. In Russia priest Gapon led the suffering urban population in St Petersburg into a protest demanding improvements in their condition.

When a leader blames others: M7 and the New Year message

This is what a good leader does. When things go well, he/she shares credit with his/her team. When things go wrong the leader takes full responsibility.

In Museveni’s Uganda things are done differently. When Uganda was described as star performer in structural adjustment program; when Uganda was congratulated for confronting HIV & AIDS boldly and when Uganda was praised for its efforts to bring about peace and stability in the Great Lakes region, President Museveni took all the credit. He attended all the Summits at the United Nations in New York and G8. He spoke with confidence that Uganda would end poverty and suffering and would become an industrialized nation within fifteen years. And nothing would stop Museveni in these endeavors.

When things turned sour, Museveni has blamed everyone but himself. He is known for blaming Ugandans as lazy and drunkards, blaming Ugandans as empty tins, idiots and bankrupt. He has blamed opposition groups for sabotaging NRM worthy efforts, civil servants for incompetence and corruption although he is the one who appoints and promotes them. He has blamed development partners for donating insufficient funds and foreign experts for giving wrong advice. He has blamed slowdown in economic growth on external factors including weak developed country markets and “Acts of God” beyond NRM control. His New Year message is a repeat of what Museveni does when things have gone wrong.

2012 the worst year for NRM government

Here are the principal highlights.

1. The mysterious death of a twenty four year old member of parliament has cast a thick shadow over the credibility of the government. Rightly or wrongly, the people of Uganda appear to have made up their mind thereby denting the image of Tutsi-led NRM government. The puzzle that MP Hussein Kyanjo was poisoned remains unsolved. The latest scare that the vice president had been poisoned and had to rush to hospital has left Ugandans wondering who is safe in Uganda and abroad. The allegation of poisoning Ugandans needs to be taken up in 2013.

2. Politically, NRM fared badly in 2012. A new government within NRM government was formed by Ssekikubo, Baryomunsi and Nawagaba. The fight for presidential succession by the first lady, prime minister and speaker of parliament raffled NRM feathers. To put a halt to it, the president announced a year after he had been fraudulently re-elected that he was seeking re-election in 2016. The potential for NRM implosion shouldn’t be underestimated. Meanwhile, Museveni is grooming his son Muhoozi to succeed him, witness rapid promotions including the one conferred on him by the late Gaddafi. To keep NRM together and his involvement as chairman of regional organizations, Museveni is spending less time on Uganda’s economic, social and environmental development.

When people understand, they can’t lose

Ugandans are going through a hard time under Museveni dictatorship which his supporters interpret as bold leadership. But we should not lose hope. Contrary to what many believe, God hasn’t forgotten Uganda. We only happen to be passing through a rough phase. Those who fly between Europe and USA know there are turbulent sections across the Atlantic where passengers are advised to return to their seats and fasten seat belts. When the turbulent area is over the flight is smooth. That is where Uganda is now. In the end Ugandans will go through the stormy weather which is caused in large part by hanging onto traditional beliefs one of them being that we are created differently – some are born to lead and others to be led. Some are refusing to change their mindset.

In my home area of Rujumbura in southwest Uganda, Bairu (Batutsi slaves or servants) were conditioned to believe that Batutsi were more intelligent and born leaders. Bairu were born to labor for Batutsi. Men were conditioned never to cry or scream under whatever amount of torture by Batutsi (I understand in Rwanda this requirement applied to women as well). And we accepted it.

The role of civil resistance in Brazilian transition from military rule to democracy

The publication of the National Recovery Plan (NRP) in 2011 accessible at www.udugandans.org which presents a sharp contrast to what NRM is doing necessitated civic education on a wide range of issues. We have therefore dealt with some ‘hot’ topics that others have avoided so that Ugandans fully understand why with all the natural and human resources Uganda is retrogressing which is no longer a debatable issue. Even economic growth rates and per capita income which were used to present ‘rosy’ economic performance have declined precipitously. Economic growth has plummeted from 10 per cent in mid-1990s to around three percent currently while population is growing at 3.5 percent ahead of economic growth of 3 percent. This is not development. It is retrogression. Under these conditions Uganda cannot become a middle income country in a few years from now.

In our assessment of Uganda’s performance, we have separated processes from outcomes of development such as a higher standard of living. NRM government reports processes. For example, writing an excellent modernization of agriculture document per se won’t transform subsistence to commercial farming. Writing an impressive Poverty Eradication Action Plan with little or no implementation won’t reduce poverty. Programs have to be implemented which NRM has failed to do. Constructing schools and graduating students every year is necessary but not sufficient. Education makes sense only when graduates get jobs and earn good income to meet at least the basic needs of life.

Museveni acting in the footsteps of Cromwell

As Yoweri Museveni prepares to handover state house keys to his son and turn Uganda into a Tutsi dynasty, we need to know the extent to which Museveni learned from Oliver Cromwell in his rise to power and creation of conditions for his son’s hereditary succession.

James I and Charles I the Stuart kings of England believed and practiced absolute rule (absolutism) and divine-right of kings. They ignored Parliament, imposed taxes and dismissed it when it suited them. Parliament and the English people resented the Stuart kings first because they were foreigners from Scotland and second they ignored English traditions.

In 1642, while in session, Charles attempted to arrest some leading members of Parliament, touching off the civil war (1642-49). Those who fought for the king were called Cavaliers and for Parliament against the dictator king led by Oliver Cromwell Roundheads. The Roundheads won. Absolutism and the monarchy came to an end.

Baganda must stop blaming Banyankole for their suffering

I am writing this story fully aware of the potential political cost. But the story has to be told in order to identify the cause of Baganda suffering and put the matter to rest for good.

Virtually every weekend you hear someone on Hollywood-based Radio Munansi complaining that Baganda are suffering because of Banyankole and when time comes the latter will pay a heavy price. I heard this narrative again when I was in London for the conference on federalism at the end of October, 2012.

I have written some articles on this subject demonstrating that Banyankole have nothing to do with Baganda marginalization and suffering. The majority of Banyankole are suffering like other exploited Ugandans under the NRM government. We also need to draw a distinction between Banyankole and the ruling Batutsi many of them Rwandese that have settled in Uganda particularly in Buganda (have adopted Luganda names and speak Luganda language) since the 1959 social revolution in Rwanda.

Discussing this subject of Batutsi in Uganda and their direct and indirect wrong doing has been made extremely difficult by anti-sectarian law and accusations of genocide promotion which Batutsi have taken advantage of to entrench themselves in Uganda and are in the process of taking over the country under the guidance of Museveni using most of the time Uganda citizens mostly Baganda in return for favors.

Clarifications regarding London federal conference

Some issues have been raised that call for explanation.

1. A federal government system doesn’t mean elimination of central government. It means sharing power between central (federal) government and local administrations (state, province, region or district, etc). How much power is shared depends on negotiations and adjustments overtime. A federal system is not an event but a process subject to amendments to accommodate the new reality.

2. Under a federal system of government, it doesn’t mean that local administrations can do whatever they want. They will be guided by federal and international norms and standards. For example, individual and collective human rights and fundamental freedoms can’t be abused. The local government can’t use its natural resources irresponsibly but sustainably for present and future generations.

3. A federal government isn’t about creating new kingdoms, strengthening or weakening existing ones.

4. A federal system of government isn’t about creating pure ethnic or tribal units. It is about empowering all people in a particular geographic area to use their talents, resources and traditions to develop themselves. For example when a federal system is finally adopted, it doesn’t mean that people say non-Baganda or non-Banyankole will be chased out of Buganda or former Ankole district. Also in areas where there are minority groups the federal government will ensure that their interests are protected.

Uganda: complicated birth; difficult upbringing

Uganda, the size of the United Kingdom, was born after a complicated ‘pregnancy’ following the Berlin conference; border adjustment negotiations among the United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium and France; religious and colonial wars that left some parts devastated. The outcome was compression into one country of segments of society with different cultures, hostile neighbors, different government systems and levels of economic and social development. Indirect rule using former oppressive chiefs over their subjects and employment of Baganda advisers to other parts of Uganda complicated the situation. Buganda was rewarded with territory taken from Bunyoro for cooperation in subduing the latter, a deal that Bunyoro never accepted. Through the 1900 agreement, Dundas reforms of 1944 and the 1955 agreement, Buganda was accorded a status of a state within a state. Because of various local administration ordinances, the colonial administration introduced a strong decentralized government system at provincial and district levels at the expense of central administration. Collaboration between colonial administration and the Protestant Church at the expense of Catholic and Muslim Faiths also created complications.

UDU is about social justice for all Ugandans

Uganda’s society since NRM came to power in 1986 has been dominated by a few rich families that continue to accumulate wealth at the expense of the majority. The rich have been using Social Darwin doctrine – the survival of the fittest – to explain why they are doing well while others are doing very poorly, adding that the poor should be blamed for their poverty and vulnerability. The fact that poverty and wealth have coexisted in time and space, one needs to understand whether or not there is causality. Given my experience in the areas I am familiar with there is a direct relationship. Those who become rich in a particular community exploit those that end up poor.