Museveni is creating two economic and social systems in Uganda

When I started writing about Museveni’s Uganda, many commentators thought I was either crazy or had an axe to grind against Museveni and Tutsi. The response was quick and acidic in many instances, hoping I would be intimidated and stop writing or move on to other subjects. Friends and relatives also felt I was endangering myself and those related to me and urged me to stop. I didn’t comply and many have since dissociated themselves and don’t want to have anything to do with me.

What I am doing is not for me personally and didn’t jump into it abruptly. I thought long and hard and prayed before I leapt into action. I am doing it to save Uganda from itself because I see trouble ahead. I have studied revolutions and rebellions very carefully. And I see Uganda getting closer to a revolution or rebellion that will not be prevented by AK47s and air force jets or branding Ugandans as idiots and fools.

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.

Religion has pivotal role in Uganda’s development

If the NRM government had done what it promised in its ten-point program, we would not be discussing the role of religion in Uganda’s development and politics. But since 1987 when it launched structural adjustment, the government left economic growth and distribution of benefits to market forces and trickle down mechanism and concentrated on building and consolidating security forces and engaging in regional and international ventures. By 2009 the government realized that the economy and society did not do well under structural adjustment and abandoned the model. Economies in success story countries like South Korea and Singapore grew at an average rate of ten percent for decades with state participation. And economic benefits were shared equitably. In Uganda, economic growth has fallen far short of ten percent. And the benefits have disproportionately gone to the few families that were already rich and are boasting in public, leaving the bulk of Ugandans trapped in absolute poverty, unemployment, sickness, functional illiteracy and hunger. Desperate Ugandans are flocking to their churches in search of relief. Therefore religious leaders have an obligation to act including calling on the government to take appropriate action. NRM government, instead of listening and collaborating with religious institutions to find a lasting solution, has begun accusing them of engaging in anti-government subversive activities thereby dragging them into confrontational politics.

Religion has pivotal role in Uganda’s development

If the NRM government had done what it promised in its ten-point program, we would not be discussing the role of religion in Uganda’s development and politics. But since 1987 when it launched structural adjustment, the government left economic growth and distribution of benefits to market forces and trickle down mechanism and concentrated on building and consolidating security forces and engaging in regional and international ventures. By 2009 the government realized that the economy and society did not do well under structural adjustment and abandoned the model. Economies in success story countries like South Korea and Singapore grew at an average rate of ten percent for decades with state participation. And economic benefits were shared equitably. In Uganda, economic growth has fallen far short of ten percent. And the benefits have disproportionately gone to the few families that were already rich and are boasting in public, leaving the bulk of Ugandans trapped in absolute poverty, unemployment, sickness, functional illiteracy and hunger. Desperate Ugandans are flocking to their churches in search of relief. Therefore religious leaders have an obligation to act including calling on the government to take appropriate action. NRM government, instead of listening and collaborating with religious institutions to find a lasting solution, has begun accusing them of engaging in anti-government subversive activities thereby dragging them into confrontational politics.

Political and social revolutions are a copycat affair

Uganda leaders and their foreign backers who believe that Ugandans are docile and will not be influenced by Arab Spring Revolutions need to think again before it is too late. The Egyptians had all along been regarded as docile people. But at the start of 2011, they rebelled against what was considered to be a stable government with strong foreign support, powerful military and sophisticated secret service and within less than three weeks, the government was gone. Foreign backers switched sides and congratulated the revolutionaries for a job well done in the name of democracy and will of the people.

History is full of cases which show that a revolution in one place impacts on subsequent revolutions in places where there is discontent. Common discontent such as poverty, unemployment, hunger, inequality and police brutality etc brings people together as in Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen to get rid of a government responsible for their suffering. The discontent in Uganda is similar to what obtained in these Arab countries before the revolutions: high levels of poverty, unemployment, hunger, inequality and police brutality etc. In a world that has been reduced to a village by transport and information technology news and ideas are being shared instantly. For example, many Ugandans already know the details of how Wael Ghonim and colleagues organized the Egyptian revolution from his book titled “Revolution 2.0” published in early 2012. Here are a few illustrations.

There is no justification whatsoever for re-electing Museveni

Through his actions Museveni behaves as though he has never understood his role as head of state. He acts as though he is representing western interests in Uganda particularly imposing structural adjustment and joining the west on major issues. He also acts as though he is a representative of Bahororo people in Uganda who are increasingly positioning themselves to govern Uganda for a long time. He sees other Ugandans as a nuisance and despises us as people below his dignity. This comes out clearly from his statements and his body language. These actions that have defined Museveni’s twenty five year presidency should disqualify him for re-election.

Museveni has managed to hang on because of his repressive style of governance with tacit endorsement of western interests and not because he is loved by the people of Uganda except Bahororo. Western interests in Uganda will be served better by letting Museveni go – without western support Museveni would not have lasted a couple of years.

How Uganda got into the socio-ecological mess and why it will continue

To solve a problem, one needs to fully understand its causes first. The current challenges in Uganda represent many years of wrong policies and priorities starting in 1971. For instance, Amin’s wrong policy of ‘economic war’ which called on Ugandans to use every piece of land to boost production led to serious environmental degradation, warmer local climates and spread of disease vectors like mosquitoes that spread malaria in areas that had previously been too cold for mosquito survival. When economic and social conditions continued to deteriorate, Amin government identified population ‘explosion’ as the number one problem to be addressed through birth control. The problems got worse and forced Amin to invade a neighboring country to divert attention from the mushrooming domestic anger.

When NRM government switched to structural adjustment from the ten-point program it made a wrong policy choice by sub-contracting Uganda’s economy to the private sector in an unregulated environment. Because private sector is concerned with profit maximization, it engages in activities, labor practices and selection of locations that minimize costs. The government made other mistakes of focusing on economic growth and per capita income leaving equitable aspects to the imperfections of a trickle down mechanism of market forces, encouraging export diversification into foodstuffs without first determining domestic requirements, dismissing or marginalizing experienced Ugandans to create room for NRM cadres most of whom did not have experience in negotiating agreements and contracts and monitoring program implementation. So how did adverse social and ecological outcomes come about?

Why a paradox of Uganda’s economic growth and social decay

The unprecedented diseases of poverty in Uganda led by jiggers and malnutrition (that have become a national scandal) have not only humiliated a proud people but also embarrassed an arrogant NRM government and donors that support it. The government blamed previous ‘bankrupt’ regimes of Obote and Amin for wasting scarce resources including travelling to the United Nations and other destinations in private jets, staying in expensive hotels, hosting expensive functions to compete with superpowers and furnishing their residences with expensive imported furniture. Meanwhile Ugandans suffered all indignities and deprivations including lack of shoes and adequate food resulting in jigger infestation and severe malnutrition. Previous governments were also accused of maintaining a colonial development model that kept Uganda a producer of raw export commodities with low and fluctuating prices against ever rising prices of imported manufactured products. Unfortunately, Museveni and his government that had never run a government set about transforming Uganda’s economy and society in ways that created a paradox of economic growth and medieval social decadence (I wrote a chapter showing similarities in today’s Uganda and medieval Europe in my book titled Uganda’s Development Agenda in the 21st Century published in 2008). Below are a few examples.

A social and economic agenda for Uganda in the next five years

Whichever party wins next year’s (2011) elections, it will need to form a government that will revise the agenda the NRM has governed on since 1987 if it wants to avoid criticism as a government that has lost touch with reality.

The development plan launched a few months ago is a repeat of structural adjustment. That is why it has not been heard of since its launch. It was arranged to silence disgruntled citizens and buy time for 2011 elections. Commentaries from nationals and foreigners are all in agreement in private and/or public that things have not gone well for the majority of Ugandans under the NRM regime. Between 1990 and 2001 Uganda’s population living below $1 a day was 82.2 percent (A. K. Chowdhury and S. Erdenbileg 2006).

The first government act after 2011 elections is to make fundamental changes in the Ministry of Finance and Central Bank that have driven Uganda’s economy on a ‘bad road and in the wrong direction’. Their focus on market forces and individual effort hoping that the sum total of those efforts would benefit all Ugandans equitably has been an inappropriate policy. While reliance on foreign experts may continue to be necessary, this should be limited to specific cases for short-term assistance only. Uganda has a reservoir of well trained and experienced people who are not being used or used properly because loyalty has replaced competence. Most well-educated and qualified Ugandans are scattered around the world or hibernating at home because they are not wanted for fear they might replace incompetent relatives and friends of those in power.

The difficulty of applying Malthus essay to Uganda’s population

Uganda’s population challenges enter the development discourse when there are serious economic and social problems. Amin condemned population growth when the economy turned sour and ordered doctors to deal with it through contraception which he had banned a few years earlier. Currently (in 2010) Uganda’s population ‘explosion’ is again at the center of the development debate, invoking Malthus’ idea of population racing ahead of food production.

Malthus stated that population was growing geometrically (1,2,4,8,16 etc) while food production was growing arithmetically (1,2,3,4,5 etc), implying that all the food produced would be consumed in the same country. He concluded that if not checked, the least able to procure food would starve to death. Those able would survive – hence the survival of the fittest concept developed by Charles Darwin based on Malthus’ essay. The essay was written for Europe and North America. He used statistics compiled by Benjamin Franklin whose figures had included migration into America where it has had no application. During the 18th century agricultural productivity had doubled which Malthus ignored when he published his essay on population in 1798. One of the principle recommendations to check population growth was delayed marriage.