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.

Museveni has grand ideas but a steep mountain to climb

It is always admirable to have dreams and to take calculated risks to accomplish them. Museveni has had big dreams. People take different routes to realize their dreams. Some take political routes dodging obstacles on the way while others resort to the barrel of the gun in a hurry and crush every obstacle on the way. Some get to the top of the mountain, others fail to do so.

Museveni started off his long journey by becoming president of Uganda using the barrel of the gun (the political route was too slow). He wanted to use Uganda, a small country, to rise to greatness which included restoration of Mpororo kingdom and formation of Tutsi Empire in the great lakes region and first head of the East African political federation and play a leading role on the African and global stages.

The inclusion of cultural institutions in the 1995 constitution was designed to help restore Mpororo kingdom. The project has run into difficulties because the idea of kingdoms or cultural heads is not popular in southwest Uganda. Discussions of Mpororo in the media, reappearance of Mpororo kingdom on Uganda maps and singing Mpororo benefits are attempts to sell the idea which has remained unpopular. Twisting arms to restore the kingdom will have unintended results especially as it violates the human rights of others.

Why imposed foreign ideas don’t work

When you force a square peg into an object with a round hole you won’t succeed.

You damage both objects or one gets more damaged than the other. Similarly, when foreign projects or ideas, however altruistic or technically sound, are imposed especially quickly on different cultures, chances are they will not succeed and people in the receiving cultures might get hurt in the process. Foreign ideas such as indirect rule, modern birth control and structural adjustment programs that have been imposed on recipient populations have generally run into difficulties and caused suffering.

More often than not people hesitate to accept new ideas for rational reasons. For example, subsistence farmers are generally hesitant to replace old with new seeds for fear that if something goes wrong they might starve. Peasant farmers hesitate to sell their land and start business in towns for fear that business failure might spell disaster for the entrepreneur and his/her family. Poorly educated workers generally hesitate to look for another job especially during economic hard times because should they fail in the new job, they may not get another one or do so quickly. So they stick with what they have regardless of low pay and/or unsatisfactory working conditions.