Uganda needs a new development path for security and prosperity

Ugandans need to take stock of what has gone wrong in the economic area since NRM came to power in 1986 and to decide what development path they need to take since the Washington Consensus (WC) which the NRM government adopted lock, stock and barrel in 1987 has failed to deliver as expected and was abandoned in 2009. No credible alternative model has been developed by NRM regime.

To craft an appropriate alternative to WC we need to understand its major characteristics. Washington Consensus replaced Uganda’s mixed economy model with laissez-faire capitalism and the invisible hand of market forces that served as the engine of economic growth. The role of the state in the economy was reduced significantly.

Trade and financial liberalization, privatization of public enterprises, export diversification, macroeconomic stability and balanced budgets formed the new development paradigm. The equitable distribution of economic growth benefits was to be effected through a trickle down mechanism. The state was primarily concerned with maintenance of law and order, enforcement of contracts and protection of property rights. Uganda pursued economic activities in which it has the so-called comparative advantage namely production and export of agricultural raw materials. By 2009 it was concluded that the model had not worked as expected as shown below:

Salient features in government’s reports to parliament

This week, we received one report and two speeches that were presented to parliament: report on the background to the budget for 2011/2012 fiscal year; Museveni’s address to parliament; and budget speech to parliament delivered by the minister of finance on behalf of the president. This is an annual exercise. The mandate, criteria used and data selected have distorted or omitted vital information.

1. The mandate of the background report to the budget is to highlight priorities of the coming national budget in the context of key economic trends and recent performance of government programs. The president’s mandate is to report what was done in the last twelve months and to appraise members of parliament of plans and strategies for the next twelve months. The mandate in the budget speech is to present to parliament estimates of revenue and expenditure for the financial year. Thus, in the three documents there is no specific mandate for reporting on the impact of government programs on ecological and human conditions such as soil erosion, poverty and malnutrition reduction. This is a serious shortcoming since development should be sustainable and human-centered.

In Uganda religious leaders can make a difference

Our doctrine is that Ugandans will liberate themselves from Museveni’s military dictatorship and the NRM failed system via a wide range of instruments including mass media and collaboration with religious leaders. The international community is called upon to level the playing field as Ugandans embark on a journey to freedom through peaceful demonstrations which are an integral part of our human rights including the right to self-determination and crafting a governance system that accommodates specific interests. That the European Union and Commonwealth observer teams concluded that the February 18, 2011 presidential and parliamentary elections were ‘not free and fair’ is a commendable beginning.

From time immemorial religious leaders have played a vital role (and some of them paid a heavy price) in easing the suffering of people meted out by their leaders. For example, John Ball a follower of John Wycliffe contributed tremendously through speeches and writing (e.g. “All men by Nature Were Created Alike”) in support of English peasants that had suffered exploitation. The peasants revolted in 1381 resulted in the abolition of the poll tax imposed in 1380 which sparked the great revolt.

An animal that will die does not hear the hunter’s horn

We have a proverb in western Uganda which says (crudely translated) that a wild animal that is to die does not hear the hunting horn when it is blown. It therefore stays in harm’s way until it is speared to death. The same can be said about Museveni. He does not appear to have realized that there is a wind of change blowing across Uganda. The wind which blew in his favor for the last 25 years has changed direction. How has this happened?

First, Museveni was picked in 1980 by some western powers for geopolitical purposes in the great lakes region. They helped him with finance, media and diplomatic cover as he removed old governments and installed new ones at a great cost in human life including the alleged genocide of Hutu in DRC, pillaging Congo’s resources and supporting militias. His role in Uganda, Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi and DRC is not in dispute. That assignment is over.

Second, Museveni was used to support SPLA in the civil war in Sudan. That assignment is now over.

Third, Museveni was used to experiment structural adjustment program as a development model after it ran into trouble in Chile and Ghana. The experiment failed miserably and was terminated in 2009.

Spontaneous revolts don’t wait for police permits

When Uganda’s Inspector General of Police Major General Kale Kayihura talks about receiving advance information from leaders about planned demonstrations, the date, venue and the numbers expected, he has in mind an ordinary demonstration regarding say a complaint about frequent floods in the capital city of Kampala. This kind of demonstration is not a revolt to change government.

What Ugandans have in mind are revolts similar to what happened during the peasants’ revolts in medieval Europe, French Revolution etc to change the regime or score major points except that we plan to do it peacefully and democratically through demonstrations.

In time and space, revolts and revolutions represent deep-seated and long-held grievances like poverty, unemployment and hunger as well as elections rigging as in Uganda since 1980. Ugandans have been frustrated for a long time and are very angry. They want to stop Museveni who has brought untold suffering from continuing as leader of Uganda after the messy elections.

What Ugandans are waiting for is a spark and this cannot be predicted in terms of date, venue or leaders. It could happen any time and possibly without leaders. Therefore there won’t be time to apply for police permits. Museveni did not get a police permit before he entered Luwero in 1981. So why does he demand one when we know he won’t give it.

Western leaders should not wait until Uganda starts to burn

There is increasing political, economic, social and ecological evidence that Uganda is heading for a deadly collision between the rulers and the ruled. It appears that Uganda leaders and development partners have not learned from Uganda’s history since the 1960s.

The second half of the 1960s was characterized by a serious political and constitutional crisis that paved the way for the 1970 military coup that brought Amin to power. Amin destroyed the country demographically (over three hundred thousand dead), professionally, economically and socially hoping that he would silence dissent and rule for life. He even invaded a neighboring country to consolidate support at home. Amin’s atrocities resulted in a war with Tanzania and Uganda rebels that left many parts of the country devastated.

The 1980 general elections were won by Uganda Peoples’ Congress (UPC) led by Obote and certified legitimate by international observers (based on ‘prevailing circumstances’). The verdict was rejected by opposition parties. A few groups unhappy with the democratic process took to the bush and waged a very destructive five-year guerrilla war forcing a section of the national army to topple the government in July 1985 which was six months later removed from power by guerrillas led by Museveni.

No leader can build a strong nation by neglecting food, education and health

There is no country in the world that has progressed without paying sufficient attention to food and nutrition security, healthcare and education. The vital role of nutrition, healthcare including safe drinking water, adequate sanitation and general hygiene has been stressed in mortality decline. General education has also been recognized as a pillar in nation building.

Mothers Union in Uganda provided women with general education in home economics: adequate and balanced diet, drinking boiled water and avoiding eating raw food, washing hands with soap or ash after using a toilet and before touching food, draining stagnant water to eliminate breeding space for mosquitoes, washing clothes, bathing regularly and keeping the house and its surroundings tidy etc.

At school teachers made sure that pupils were clean: bathed, brushed their teeth, had no lice and wore clean uniforms. Pupils were required to bring lunches and by sharing different foodstuffs they ate balanced meals. Parents therefore made sure that there was enough food at the household level. Consequently, they tended two fields: one specifically for foodstuffs for domestic consumption and the other for cash crops such as coffee, cotton or tobacco. Food for domestic consumption was never sold. Parents would be alerted when their child showed signs of sickness and would be taken to a dispensary for check up. Schools were inspected regularly to make sure standards of teaching, quality of lunches and the general health of pupils were maintained.

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 think Museveni picked up a gun to save Uganda, you are mistaken

If you think Museveni picked up a gun while still a student at Dar es Salaam University in the 1960s to remove Amin (who had not yet become president) you are mistaken. Amin became president in 1971 after Museveni had left the university in 1970.

If you think Museveni abandoned his family and waged a very destructive five year guerrilla war in Luwero because of the rigged 1980 elections you are again mistaken. Museveni had begun recruiting fighters well before the 1980 elections. He had some 10,000 fighters (Communication from the Chair April 23 1985) – not 27 as he claims – when he launched the guerrilla war in 1981.

If you think Museveni adopted shock therapy structural adjustment to end the suffering of the people of Uganda quickly you are even more mistaken. He was already aware of its devastation in Chile and Ghana. He was also aware (because he had a good source of information) that even World Bank officials had expressed alarm at the negative impact on the African people. For example, in 1984 Ernest Stern senior vice-president at the World Bank was candid when he observed that structural adjustment had failed the Africa region. He continued “We … have failed in Africa along with everybody else … we have not always designed our projects to fit the … conditions in Africa”. Julian Samboma amplified that “… with their usual arrogance, the IMF/World Bank continued to force these self-same policies down Africa’s throat”(New African February 1993). Some African countries like Tanzania and Ghana protested but not Uganda.

How Museveni is silently turning Uganda into another Ivory Coast

It has been reported that migrant workers have triumphed over indigenous population in Ivory Coast’s presidential and parliamentary elections – essentially taking over the country. Museveni in collaboration with or under the direction of foreign advisers is methodically, silently and incrementally turning Uganda into another Ivory Coast. This is being done by increasing migrants through favorable policies and reducing indigenous population through birth control measures. I have already written an article (posted on home page of www.kashambuzi.com) arguing that immigrants will soon outnumber indigenous Ugandans. Let us see how Museveni is doing it beginning with policies that are encouraging foreigners to enter Uganda under conditions that are not clear to the public.

First, Museveni’s decision to adopt the shock therapy version of structural adjustment or economic recovery in 1987 was not an accident. It was designed to introduce unpopular decisions quickly before opposition groups organized to resist them. They also required dictatorial methods of governance which have been tacitly endorsed by Museveni’s foreign backers and conveniently described as bold leadership.