Museveni misled the people of Uganda

Many Ugandans have been disappointed by Museveni’s government in large part because they do not understand why he came to power. Museveni, like Mobutu and Amin before him, came to power at the height of Cold War confrontations between capitalism and socialism. The return of Obote as president in 1980 represented a return of socialism to Uganda which had been defeated in 1971 using Amin. Western powers and corporate interests were alarmed by the return of socialism to Uganda through the return of Obote as president after 1980 elections. Obote was still considered a socialist. Museveni, like Amin, was used by western capitalist forces to remove socialism by ousting its agent – President Obote. Since these western interests were not going to send European troops to the jungles of Luwero, Museverni appealed to disgruntled Ugandans especially Baganda and Catholics to join him in ousting Obote who had ‘stolen’ the 1980 elections although certified by the Commonwealth observer team that has certified Museveni’s victories since the 1996 elections.

If Museveni is reelected Uganda’s future will get worse

Many Ugandans and some non-Ugandans especially from the great lakes region believe – rightly or wrongly – that Museveni will do everything to get reelected to avoid being dragged to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. He will also ensure that he gets over two-thirds of NRM candidates elected so that Parliament rubber stamps his decisions. Then the following will likely occur as mentioned in conversations so far.

1. The defeated Ugandans will adopt a passive resistance strategy that will further cripple the economy that is already in bad shape with over 55 percent of Ugandans living below the poverty line.

2. Museveni will basically retain his present core cabinet of ‘yes men and women’ who will continue to tell him what he wants to hear. He will likely create a new ministry of petroleum or expand the current ministry of energy and appoint one of his closest relatives turning oil revenue from a savior to a curse for Ugandans.

Highlights of the population debate

1. The population debate has been with us for a very long time dating as far back as classical Greece and Rome. It has evolved overtime and now includes population explosion and implosion as well as women’s reproductive health and rights.

2. At the global level population dynamics is a function of changes in births and deaths. However, at the national level (e.g. Uganda) total population is a function of births – deaths + in-migrants – out-migrants.

3. The world population change has gone through three phases: the first phase occurred in the Neolithic Revolution caused by shifts from nomadic hunter/gatherer communities to crop production and animal domestication making more food available to feed more mouths in settled communities and reduced deaths; the second phase from the Industrial Revolution that started around 1750. Improved transport systems and cold storage facilities connected food surplus to deficit regions and public health including general hygiene, safe drinking water and sanitation that lowered mortality; the third phase began in the late 1950s and is characterized by medical and technological advances that too lowered death rate. Thus, all these phases from the first through the third have one thing in common: they saved lives and increased life expectancy. Thus, during these three phases the increase in population was not because couples were having more babies. It is because people were living longer due to a reduction in mortality.

How will Uganda get out of the poverty trap?

The 2010 UNDP’s Human Development report has recorded that between 2000 and 2008 51.5 percent of Ugandans lived below $1.25 a day with an index ranking of 143 out of 169. This high level of poverty and associated ills is unacceptable. So, what should be done to get Uganda out of this poverty trap?

First and foremost, Uganda leaders and senior civil servants must genuinely admit that the development model pursued in since 1987 did not work as expected for inter alia the following reasons.

1. The average economic growth rate did not reach 7 or 8 percent essential as minimum for achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015.

2. Excess capacity inherited in 1986 contributed more than economic reforms to economic growth and that that excess capacity is almost exhausted, calling for other sources of growth.

3. Trickle down mechanism failed to distribute the benefits of economic growth equitably resulting in skewed income distribution in favor of rich few families and spreading and deepening poverty.

4. Excessive obsession with macroeconomic stability especially inflation control to 5 percent and balanced budgets constrained investment and job growth because of very high interest rates and starved agriculture and social and infrastructural sectors of essential funding.

What has Uganda family planning skipped?

Since Museveni and his National Resistance Movement (NRM) government came to power in 1986, Ugandans have developed a habit of dragging the country into fads without proper analysis of pros and cons or even when they know these fads won’t work. Because Museveni likes to be in the news or popular with the west he has plunged Uganda into experiments in economics, agriculture, health, etc that have overall produced adverse outcomes. Uganda adopted shock therapy version of structural adjustment in 1987 fully aware that it had been rejected in Ghana because of negative consequences. Uganda adopted abstinence in the fight against HIV knowing fairly well that it would not work. Uganda also developed a confrontational regional policy in an atmosphere of geopolitics that has created poor relations with neighbors witness the plunder of Congo resources, meddling in Kenya’s 2007 elections and the latest allegation that Uganda troops were involved in Hutu genocide in DRC. Also Uganda elite have become obsessed with making money or keeping their jobs that many will fully support donor-driven projects or government programs even when they know they will hurt their fellow citizens.

The guerrillas gave us NRM and are taking our land

The task of a researcher is to identify problems and make recommendations for policy makers to act on. A lot has been written and published about Uganda but much more remains to be done to identify challenges especially those related to globalization and East African community and the associated influx of foreigners looking for land to own.

Uganda is a country whose economy and livelihood of her people depend on land for food and foreign exchange. The land has been worked and owned by peasants for centuries. British colonial authorities respected and protected that age-old tradition. In 1986, NRM government presented a people-centered ten-point program confirming that land belongs to the people. It gave an assurance that peasants who lost their land due to political instability and/or faulty policies would get it back.

In 1987, the government launched structural adjustment with a major policy shift and a potential adverse impact on peasants. Private sector and market forces would drive Uganda’s economy and the distribution of assets. Studies were conducted that emphasized large-scale farming as a more appropriate model for speeding up economic growth and transformation from subsistence to commercial agriculture. In other words, peasants were presented as less productive than large-scale farmers and should give way to the latter. Other studies supported rapid urbanization as the fastest path to Uganda’s development, implying rural-urban influx to create room for large farmers. Free mobility and settlement would be facilitated through various instruments.

Adjustment and anti-terrorism policies have saved Museveni presidency

First and foremost, Museveni is president of Uganda to advance his own interests. In true democratic sense Museveni is not popular because of corruption and sectarianism as can be deduced from elite and peasant comments. He has used a combination of security forces, impoverishing Ugandans and collaborating with western powers in structural adjustment and anti-terrorism – areas that are not popular in the Horn and Great Lakes regions – to stay in power.

When structural adjustment ran out of steam in Ghana, the experiment was transferred to Uganda in 1987. Museveni adopted the extreme version (shock therapy) of structural adjustment favored by western sponsors the implementation of which required an authoritarian leader who would not tolerate riots. Museveni was also needed in great lakes geopolitics that resulted in changing governments in Rwanda in 1994 and in Zaire in 1997.

In return Museveni was saved from early multi-party politics which were imposed on others, allowed to strangle pre-independence Uganda Peoples’ Congress (UPC) and Democratic Party (DP), received huge amounts of money and training for his security forces and consolidated military, economic and political power in his hands. He threatened Ugandans that he would go back to the bush and cause another hell if not elected president in 1996. Most development partners did not raise a finger when all these things were happening because they did not want to upset a reliable ally.

Ugandans must know the damage Museveni has caused before they go to the polls

Discussions about Uganda by Ugandans convey a simple message: there is anger out there. People have been hit hard (insanity, joblessness, alcoholism, domestic violence, jiggers, human sacrifice etc) and blame Museveni for this suffering. In Uganda culture, the head of the family has overall responsibility. He/she takes credit when things go well and accepts blame when they go wrong. They seek guidance on how to make things better. Similarly, Museveni as Uganda head of state has responsibility and accountability for commissions and omissions in Uganda. Like head of the household, Museveni should seek guidance on how to improve the desperate situation. Here are examples of the damage he has caused as president for twenty five years.

Damage number one: The first responsibility of the head of a family or nation is to make sure that every member of the household eats enough breakfast, lunch and dinner. Men travelled long distances in search of food when there was famine in their locations. Others committed suicide as punishment for failure to feed their families, demonstrating the importance of food security.

If Bairu don’t stick together they will be finished

I have written this article fully aware of the risks and dangers involved and that I will be criticized heavily by Bairu people currently holding jobs in NRM government who do not want trouble. I will also be threatened and/or abused by Bahima and Bahororo rulers in Uganda who do not want their plans to destroy Bairu (slaves of Bahima and Bahororo) exposed. Ugandans who do not live in southwest Uganda especially in Ntungamo and Rukungiri districts and foreigners associated with Uganda may not understand the historical antagonistic relationship between Nilotic Bahima and Bahororo on the one hand and Bantu-Bairu people on the other hand which is getting worse in subtle ways. Bairu people have been divided and impoverished and denied justice for too long. The little justice they had gained is being taken away since Bahororo-led NRM government came to power in 1986. Bairu, like any other group, demand justice.

Stop blaming “Acts of God” for collapse of Uganda’s social systems

Pictures of and stories about Ugandans suffering and dying from jiggers and malnutrition have not only humiliated Ugandans but also embarrassed the NRM government that fought a five-year devastating guerrilla war to end the long suffering of Uganda people. Statements about making hunger and jiggers history were repeated at national and international conferences. Obote and Amin regimes were bitterly attacked for failing to meet basic human needs. Museveni and his government assured the nation and the whole world that Uganda would only export surplus food over and above domestic demand with a balance in quantity and quality. And everyone would wear shoes everyday and live in a decent house! Ugandans rallied behind the government and were even prepared to tighten belts further to give the government time to put appropriate programs in place. That was in 1986 and Ugandans have waited for the day when poverty and its offshoots of hunger, ignorance and disease would end. However, as time passed, rapid economic growth and success stories failed to trickle down and put food on the table and make shoes available. Ugandans began to wonder whether the promise would be fulfilled and demanded an explanation about rising unemployment and poverty in the midst of rapid economic growth which hit ten per cent in mid-1990s.