Museveni has begun metamorphosing Uganda into a new landscape

If we Ugandans do not put our act together quickly, we are going to lose Uganda as we have known it. Museveni who began preparations as early as 1965 (Bahororo failure to get a separate district in Ankole at independence and political ascendancy of Bairu in Ankole disturbed him) came to power with a clear mission known to himself and his inner core of Bahororo people – (1) the ascendancy of Bahororo in Uganda’s political economy and great lakes region (Tutsi Empire), and (2) metamorphosis of Uganda into a new landscape.

Museveni was also aware that these transformations would take a long time to be realized. That is why he initially asked for a fifteen year mandate which has turned out to be inadequate. During an interview on New Year’s Day (2011), Museveni declined to indicate when he would quit Uganda’s political stage. The impression he gave left no doubt that he is still around for a while possibly by force should Ugandans refuse to re-elect him. What he has not admitted is that he thought (wrongly) that he would quickly trample on Ugandans through wars and impoverishment and reduce them to insignificant vulnerable minority and transform Uganda into a new landscape ecologically, economically, demographically and politically without difficulty. Ugandans have turned out to be resilient in the face of wars, pandemics, epidemics and impoverishment and are still kicking with considerable force that cannot be ignored.

Has Museveni’s bad governance of Uganda been deliberate?

Wherever you look – economic equitability, food and nutrition security, quality education and healthcare and biodiversity protection etc – you see deficits. That is why even those at the UN, BWIs (World Bank and IMF) and bilateral partners are quietly distancing themselves from Museveni’s development failure and ruthless dictatorship.

Museveni came to power at a time when Uganda was ready for positive change. Ugandans wanted change that would help all of them put food on the table, send their children to school, find remunerative and decent jobs, move out of subsistence economy, enjoy healthy lives, good neighborly relations and protect their lives and properties earned intellectually (an article posted on the internet for example) or through physical labor etc.

Britain has caused too much trouble and suffering in Uganda

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.

Why Museveni is not trusted as leader of Uganda

There are good and bad leaders. Good leaders have characteristics including persuasion that make them popular and eliminate resort to force. Leadership qualities – good or bad – are detected early in one’s life. A good leader even among children persuades, a bad one bullies. Good leaders are trusted and are well known in their communities and therefore popular. When they arrive in a village all people are eager to meet and welcome them. Bad leaders lead to debates about who should meet them because none likes them even many of those working for them.

Throughout his school days, Museveni did not exhibit qualities (intellectual and social etc) that would qualify him as a good leader. And people who know him very well including some of his teachers will tell you that Museveni was driven into politics by the desire to dominate others not to serve the interest of the general public. He wanted to dominate by impoverishing or marginalizing subjects as we have witnessed over the last 25 years of his rule. This conclusion and his actions together with uncertainties surrounding his place of birth have made Ugandans to judge Museveni as unpopular and a poor leader. That is why he has gained positions by default and/or through rigging elections (EIR 1997 and John F. Clark (2002). Consequently, Museveni has failed to win the hearts of Ugandans for the following illustrative reasons.

Museveni came to power by default, has stayed by hiding vital information

By and large a decision taken when one is angry, frustrated, tired or in a hurry is likely to be wrong. In 1981, Baganda and Catholics (no offense) with backing of some western powers led by Britain decided to wage a guerrilla war because they were angry, frustrated, tired and in a hurry that Obote had returned to power. Without proper scrutiny of each other, two ideologically opposed groups: Popular Resistance Army (PRA) and Uganda Freedom Fighters (UFF) formed the National Resistance Movement (NRM) with Yusuf Lule (RIP) as chairman and Museveni as vice chairman and also chairman of the high command of its armed wing, the National Resistance Army (NRA). This became a clear case of enemy’s enemy is a friend. What was common between the two groups is that they were both enemies (opponents to use a milder word) of Obote and UPC. What both wanted was to remove Obote and sort out their differences later, if any.

Museveni has sold Uganda to foreigners – land is next and final deal

In early 1980s a few countries including Britain decided that Museveni would be the ruler of Uganda (Peter Phillips 2006) because Obote considered to be a socialist was not trusted (Vijay Gupta 1983) to take care of foreign interests. Museveni who was a Marxist was judged to be flexible and could easily be converted into a supporter of capitalism – which he has turned out to be. Britain led a visible effort in preparing Museveni for that role and has sustained him in power since 1986.

Before considering how Ugandans might lose their land to Britain and other foreigners, let us outline the steps that have been taken to enable Britain re-colonize Uganda through Museveni. The process started in the early 1980s during the guerrilla war. How was it carried out? Tiny Rowland provided finance, William Pike communication and media connections and Linda Chalker under Thatcher government political cover. According to Andrew Spannaus “Museveni, ever since he began fighting to take power in Uganda in the early 1980s, was backed by Baronnes Lynda Chalker, former Minister for Overseas Development of the Empire “ (EIR September 1997). His intellectual credentials which were previously considered insignificant were boosted by foreigners – African and non-African. Gerry O’Kane reported that Museveni was described as the intellectual who picked up a gun and used magical powers in his guerrilla war against Obote government (New Africa March 1986).

Museveni has failed, he must go

One of the tasks of teachers is to identify students with potential leadership qualities and prepare them accordingly. A student who is always punctual is made a time keeper. A student who likes reading is made a librarian. A student who is the best soccer/football player is made captain. A student who does well among scouts is made troop leader, and student who has overall leadership qualities is made prefect etc. These student leaders observe the behavior of their fellow students and identify those that could succeed them and on some occasions recommend them to the headmaster who finally takes the decision.

People who know Museveni very well as a student are in general agreement that he did not exhibit leadership qualities. During the interim period between the fall of Amin in 1979 and the elections of 1980, Museveni did not impress Ugandans as a national or constituency leader. He lost an election for Member of Parliament in 1980, yet he had been one of those who fought and defeated Amin.

How Museveni has used structural adjustment to strangle opponents

People close to Museveni will tell you (on condition you do not quote them) that he believes very strongly in dominating others. Deep in his heart he thinks God created him specifically for that role which he must bequeath to a member of his family. Some Ugandans who want Museveni to favor them call him God send to save Uganda! Museveni has a mission much larger than Uganda. On April 4, 1997 he disclosed that “My mission is to see that Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi and Zaire [DRC] become federal states under one nation [and one leader]” (EIR Special Report 1997). He might add on Somalia at a later stage if his troops perform well there.

Earlier Museveni had revealed that as a pan-Africanist he had larger ambitions and would quit Uganda politics as soon as security had been restored. His dream of Tutsi Empire and political and military involvement in Burundi, Rwanda and DRC as part of that dream is well known. In fact Mugabe joined the DRC war in 1998/99 principally to stop Museveni from creating a Tutsi Empire in Middle Africa (Joseph N. Weatherby 2003).

Museveni has turned Uganda into a sad story

1986, the year Museveni became president of Uganda, coincided with an announcement from Ghana that “IMF fails to redeem”. Since 1983 Rawlings had used force to implement stabilization and structural adjustment program. In the end the experiment failed – badly. In 1986, the minister of finance publicly admitted that Ghana’s economy was in deep crisis – the ‘economic success story’ had been a hoax. There were complaints that there was something inherently wrong with international financial institutions’ (IFI) diagnosis of Africa’s challenges and the medicine they prescribed. Rawlings was accused of sowing in the wind by ignoring advice of his Ghanaian advisers in preference for IFIs – IMF and the World Bank (Africa Concord September 18, 1986). Although donors’ had poured vast amounts of money into Ghana the experiment did not work. Finally Rawlings too announced that he had been unimpressed and had had enough of IFI policies (Peter Anyang’Nyong’o 1992). Ghana quietly dropped off the World Bank/IMF list of high performers and was replaced by Uganda (Paul Nugent 2004).

Why Museveni has difficulties explaining his accomplishments

President Museveni is campaigning for reelection for another five-year term. He has been telling NRM supporters that he has a solid record of achievements for the last 25 years. But he does not elaborate on that record. Deep in his heart he knows that his performance in all areas of human endeavor has been dismal. He has been variously described as a dictator presiding over a failed state. Images around the world of Ugandans disfigured by jiggers which he condemned while waging a guerrilla war, children dying of hunger, Ugandans dying in traffic accidents because of bad roads, patients sleeping on hospital floors, children studying under trees, Kampala City under floods, shooting unarmed demonstrators while he was Chairman of the Commonwealth, demonstrations against him in New York City in 2009 and 2010, recent allegations that Uganda troops committed genocide against Hutu in DRC and terrorist attack on Kampala have left Museveni a weak and vulnerable man. That is why talk of his achievements is circumscribed.