Where did all the generous development donations to Uganda go?

The rapidly deteriorating economic, social, cultural and ecological conditions as manifested in the diseases of poverty, ecological deterioration and a breakdown in moral values to make ends meet have raised questions about the destination of massive donor development (as opposed to security and defense) aid money to Uganda. Since 1987 when the government signed an agreement with the IMF that opened the door for contributions, donors (bilateral, multilateral, UN and NGOs) have generously extended a helping hand. Additionally, Uganda was the first country to get debt relief under HIPC (Highly Indebted Poorest Countries) initiative on the understanding that the funds released would support critical poverty eradication programs such as primary education, primary health care, rural feeder roads, agricultural extension and water supply.

Donor funds were released on the basis of meeting aid conditionality (including zero-tolerance for corruption), drawing up, monitoring and evaluation of comprehensive rehabilitation and development programs.

Regarding development programs, Uganda developed excellent blue prints that received international recognition and praise for their quality in design and comprehensiveness. Here are the objectives of five of these development programs that were prepared in consultation with all stakeholders including development partners.

If you re-elect Museveni you will lose your land

Let me clear two things upfront: (1) we Ugandans must stop the deceptive habit of pleading ignorance when things go wrong and (2) we Ugandans must know that Museveni derives his mandate and instructions to govern Uganda from external sources.

I meet Uganda ministers, MPs and officials regularly. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard them deceive us that they did not know that Museveni would do such and such a thing. They would argue that if they had had advance information they would definitely have advised him against such commission. But when you probe them, more often than not, you discover that they knew but did not have the courage to confront Museveni lest they lose their jobs.

Most MPs are there to protect their jobs and get Museveni’s backing for reelection and are not going to risk all that for the sake of defending their constituents’ interests – they are not there for that! So Ugandans do not rely on your MPs to present and defend your interests. Do not return MPs that have done a poor job. That way you send a message to the new MPs that if they do not work for you they will suffer the same consequences like the ones before them who lost re-election bid.

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.

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 and external backers have made elections meaningless and wasteful

Museveni who was unpopular in student, youth and party politics before becoming president has remained so since 1986. After hard political and military campaign, Museveni was disappointed and humiliated at the Moshi conference when he failed to get elected to either of the two most important positions of leader of the transition team to replace Amin or chairman of the military commission. During the transition period (1979 to 1980), he also realized that he could not lead either UPC or DP parties. Consequently, he formed his own party – Uganda Patriotic Movement (UPM) to contest the 1980 elections. UPM won one parliamentary seat! Museveni concluded that he would never realize his dream of becoming president or any other public office through the free will of the people of Uganda. He decided he would use force, bribes and tricks to achieve his goals.

That is how he began the destructive guerrilla war that lasted five years. He deliberately destroyed Luwero to put blame on Obote and have him overthrown (EIR 1997). Knowing that Baganda and Catholics were unhappy with Obote and his UPC government, Museveni tricked them that he would provide military backing to get them into power if they came together and form a political movement. Museveni showed no external interest in wanting the post of president for himself. He presented himself as a liberator with no political ambitions.

As father of the nation Museveni has failed Uganda children and must go

In my culture – and I believe in all cultures – parents have three principle responsibilities: to feed their children adequately so that they do not fall sick; prepare them for successful adulthood; and preserve land for them. I watch movies about wild life a lot. What is common among all creatures – birds and animals alike – is that they make sure their young are fed well and protected against danger; the young are taught how to survive and succeed in a dangerous environment on their own and cared for when need arises; and protect the territory for present and future generations. Recently I watched a movie in which a lion strayed into monkeys’ territory. All the monkeys – young and old, male and female – gathered around the lion and harassed her until she left the area. The monkeys re-conquered their territory with great joy!

Ugandans have a habit of pleading ignorance when things go wrong

I have devoted some time to studying and writing books on Uganda’s political economy. One of the findings is that when things go wrong at the individual, community or national level, you hear those involved saying that if they had known, this or that would not have happened or would have been done differently. I have heard Ugandans regret that if they had known, they would not have dropped out of school or married early, or sold their land or abandoned their families or ignored their parents’ advice or voted for so and so to represent them at the district or national level or neglected environment issues in Uganda’s economic growth. Another common observation is that when events do not affect certain groups, Ugandans tend not to bother. For example, those who have comfortable jobs do not care about the unemployed. They even blame them for being lazy or drinking too much. It is only when they are directly (or family members or relatives) affected that they care and actually complain that the government is not doing enough to resolve unemployment.

Ugandans have a right to ask questions and get answers

Thankfully, Uganda has entered the Enlightenment phase of development. Enlightenment is characterized by reason: asking questions and demanding convincing answers. Therefore, Ugandans are no longer taking things for granted. The divine right of leaders is over! Anyone who enters public life must expect to be scrutinized. Ugandans have a right to know the history, ancestry, education and work experience of those seeking public office or already there. Therefore family members, relatives and friends of public figures should stop complaining when their fathers or mothers are scrutinized. If they do not want their parents or relatives to be undressed in public they should advise them to stay away from politics. You cannot have your cake and eat it too!

The National Resistance Movement (NRM) government under the leadership of President Museveni has been in power for 25 years. Since 1987, following the signing of agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) major developments have taken place and some of them have raised questions that need to be answered by the government. Below are some of them.

Ugandans have a right to be angry at their government

Ugandans have a right to be angry and to show it when a mother produces an underweight child because she is undernourished in a country that exports food to earn foreign currency to meet the needs of the few rich families; an infant dies of jiggers because of poor housing conditions and lack of shoes; a child dies of hunger because the mother is forced to produce food for cash rather than for the stomach; a child drops out of school for lack of school lunch because the government has sold food to feed children in neighboring countries; jobs go to foreign workers when Uganda graduates are unemployed because of a liberal labor and immigration policy; domestic industries are closed and workers dismissed because of a trade liberalization policy that allows in cheap used or subsidized imports; droughts and floods cause hunger and famine because of reckless and unsustainable de-vegetation policy that has adversely changed thermal and hydrological regimes; people who lose elections or are censured by parliament for corruption are appointed ministers; family members, relatives and friends of key officials are appointed, promoted or reassigned to positions they do not qualify for while qualified people are sidelined; children of rich people attend private schools at home or abroad while those from poor households languish in neglected public schools and graduate without learning anything; members and relatives of senior officials go abroad to deliver or get treatment while those from poor families die in child birth or from preventable and curable diseases because the health system has been plundered; well connected citizens steal huge sums of public funds and are not touched while junior officers who steal ‘peanuts’ to make ends meet are arrested and jailed; weak and voiceless citizens are ‘politically’ robbed and dispossessed of their land and property as in Rukungiri through municipal legislation; twenty percent of Ugandans get poorer and many more hungrier in a country that has been boasting of eradicating poverty and all its offshoots of hunger, disease and illiteracy; government divides up the country into many economically unviable districts making them dependent on central government for budget support with stiff conditionality; and government hosts expensive international conferences when money is needed to meet basic human needs of Uganda citizens etc, etc. Anger has also been accumulating for the following illustrative deceptions.