Tag Archives: their

Ugandans are not cursed by nature, we are impoverished by policies

Many Ugandans falsely believe that they were destined to fail, however hard they worked, because they were cursed at birth or even earlier – at conception. They have given up trying and resorted to destructive practices.

When I returned from exile in 1980, many families in my home village had given up hope. They had cleared all wetlands – began under Amin’s economic war – which provided thatch materials. Accordingly, they were living in houses with leaking roofs. They had also cut down all the trees to sell charcoal and had no firewood to cook beans that provide a rich source of vegetable protein.

One of the reasons my family decided to invest in Rukungiri – my home district – was largely to change this mood of despair by creating jobs. The employees soon realized that their being poor was not a curse after all but lack of opportunities and absence of a caring leadership. With their savings they started small scale projects and are doing pretty well.

Precolonial reports demonstrate that Ugandans enjoyed a comfortable livelihood except during temporary periods of famine and conflict. They produced according to their natural endowments and sold surplus in local and regional markets to obtain what they did not produce.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Ugandans must reclaim their freedom and dignity

Greetings fellow Ugandans and friends

Although born free and equal in dignity, Ugandans have lost both since colonial days. Independence did not restore our freedom and dignity. The pre-independence constitutional and election arrangements were skewed in favor of a few. Since 1966 Uganda has experienced political and economic crisis.

Economic and political troubles in neighboring countries particularly in Rwanda and Burundi resulted in economic and political refugees that have fundamentally affected Uganda’s demographic, economic and political landscape and further eroded the freedom and dignity of indigenous Ugandans. During Amin’s regime Uganda was ruled by foreigners causing extensive damage in human life, property, institutions and infrastructure because they did not care. When their time was up, they disappeared and left behind a depressing economic and political situation.

Read the full post
Posted on by

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.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Why is Museveni popular in Britain?

A former African head of state remarked that when an African leader is popular with and praised sky high by Europeans it means that by and large that leader is taking care of European interests more than those of his/her citizens.

Apart from areas of white settlement, Britain (unlike Portugal) chose to give independence to African countries without much struggle in order to keep them colonized and continue to serve British interests. It did so by influencing the choice of leaders or governing political parties. If a chosen leader digressed, he would be removed and replaced by a more compliant one.

In Uganda UPC/KY coalition and the rise to power of Obote were supported by Britain. When relations between Obote and Britain got strained Obote was removed and replaced by Amin, a gentle giant easy to do business with (Jon Abbink and Gerti Hesseling 2000 and New Africa February 2001).

As we have detailed elsewhere and posted on www.kashambuzi.com, Museveni was chosen by western powers including Britain in the early 1980s to topple Obote and UPC government (actually toppled by Okello in July 1985) because Obote was not trusted to do business with (Peter Phillips 2006 and Vijay Gupta 1983). Obote was chased out twice in 1971 and 1985 because by and large he put Uganda interests above Europeans! Amin was supported until Tanzania troops and Uganda exiles chased him out of the country in 1979.

Read the full post
Posted on by

With all the will in the world why has Museveni failed?

In countries with true democracy where citizens hire and fire their representatives through the ballot box and/or public opinion, Museveni would have resigned or forced to because he has failed to deliver on his promises. Museveni cannot step down in large part because he is not sure what will happen to him once he has lost the immunity that goes with the presidency.

Museveni has had all the support at home and abroad that he needed to succeed. Why has he failed so badly? Everywhere you look domestically, regionally and internationally you see nothing but failure. At home, the diseases of poverty and environmental degradation are undeniable, at the great lakes region level, he has been accused of removing governments, his troops of committing genocide against Hutu people in DRC and plundering DRC resources; at the AU level he has quarreled with Qaddafi and at the global level his star has faded.

Discussions with people who have known him for a long time have shed some light. First, it appears that he set high ambitions that were not matched by his capabilities. Apparently, he deceived himself that he is intellectually superior to Ugandans because of his connections with the Aryan race of Europeans and therefore did not need to listen to people of lower IQ.

Read the full post
Posted on by

If Museveni is re-elected, Uganda will enter a very delicate phase

Ugandans, development partners and friends must understand fully that Museveni’s goal – and one goal only – is to impose Bahororo hegemony over the people of Uganda through democracy at gun point. Democracy is needed for international recognition of his goal otherwise Museveni would simply use force and impose it. If Museveni is re-elected (I have advocated vigorously that he should be defeated to avoid troubles ahead), he will use the next five years (because time is not on his side) to force a conclusion of his project or lay a solid foundation for his handpicked successor to complete it. His push may provoke resistance that could result in a political and /or military confrontation and possible explosion. To prevent this from happening, we need to disaggregate the components of his power base and understand when, where, why and how his journey began. This is a tough and dangerous job but someone has to do it. I will do it for the future of all Uganda children. Those who have described me as a divider and advised Ugandans to ignore what I am saying are trying to divert your attention from Museveni’s plan for Bahororo hegemony. Bahororo (Batutsi from Rwanda) are people (whose base is in Ntungamo and Rukungiri/Rujumbura in southwest Uganda) that were represented at a meeting Museveni convened at his home in Rwakitura on March 15, 1992. The meeting was convened to agree on a road map for Bahororo hegemony. The report of that meeting and participants has been widely circulated.

Read the full post
Posted on by

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.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Kagunga residents want their land back

Rukungiri town in southwest Uganda was recently (mid-2010) upgraded to a municipality by expanding its area into Kagunga sub-county. In upgrading the township to municipality status, the procedures at the district council and parliament levels were not followed, raising many suspicions. Since the upgrade and expansion, more suspicions are emerging from Kangunga residents due to a number of factors.

First, Rukungiri town is surrounded by two other sub-counties besides Kagunga. The other two sub-counties are Buyanja and Nyakagyeme. Buyanja and Nyakagyeme have flat topographical features suitable for urban expansion. Yet the expansion has covered only Kagunga sub-county which is hilly with deep and narrow river valleys making the area not suitable for urban growth. Kagunga unlike Buyanja has no electricity supply and Nyakagyeme can easily be supplied with electricity because it is closer to the town center. Technically and geographically Buyanja and Nyakagyeme should have been chosen over Kagunga. A better alternative is to let the town expand naturally.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Land may cause a civil war in Uganda

Following publication (New Vision July 8, 2010) of a statement delivered by national coordinator of security services, General David Tinyefuza when he made a courtesy call to the district administration on his way from Masindi Artillery headquarters, there have been consultations because this is a very strong and scary statement. But before we come to the substance of this article Ugandans need to understand two things.

The first observation is that this was not a courtesy call. This was a threat. According to the World Book Dictionary courtesy means polite behavior, thoughtfulness for others. Therefore a courtesy call means a short, formal visit paid by one government official or dignitary to another as an act of courtesy or etiquette. Etiquette means the customary or formal rules for behavior in polite society. The message conveyed by General David Tinyefuza, on his courtesy call did not reflect courtesy or politeness at all.

Read the full post
Posted on by

How peasants lose their land

From time immemorial, the rich and well connected have devised ways and means to grab peasants’ land for various motives. In this article we are going to examine what happened in the past and what is happening now or is likely to happen in the future. But first let us define peasants.

Peasants are “low-status cultivators who are trapped in a double bind of material poverty and political marginality. … Peasants labor in a subsistence economy that is typically precarious and subject to the predation of powerful elites. As a result, peasants in otherwise diverse cultural and historical contexts share a common vulnerability to natural and human made disaster that constrains peasant strategies in the direction of an emphasis on subsistence security and family survival” (Joel Krieger 1993).

There are many examples throughout the world showing how peasants have lost their land. In early 16th-century Europe, rising prices and bad harvests led landowners to squeeze peasants by raising rents, enclosing common lands and increasing feudal dues.

Read the full post
Posted on by