Tag Archives: uganda

The will of the people must prevail in Uganda

As we prepare to elect our leaders on February 18, 2011, we wish to make it clear that the will of the people of Uganda must prevail this time. Since 1961 our will has been trampled by selfish leaders in collaboration with foreign interests. With education, travel experience and a better understanding of our inalienable human rights, Ugandans are more enlightened than they were in 1961.

We now understand the dangers of divisive politics along religious, geographical and ethnic lines. The days of Catholic and Protestant conflicts are over (Bairu of Akole should take notice). We are all Ugandans. The days of northern and southern conflicts are over. We are all Ugandans. Even within regions say southern region, Banyankole will not be pushed into conflict with Baganda. Those days are over. We are all Ugandans. The days of Nilotic and Bantu conflicts are over. We are all Ugandans.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Politics and human rights in Uganda

Third appearance on Radio Munansi

Greetings fellow Ugandans and friends

1. Yesterday the world witnessed a momentous and historic occasion unfold before our eyes – a revolution occurred by unarmed, fearless and gallant people of Egypt. Egyptian men and women in uniform have set very high standards for others to emulate by extending a helping hand to demonstrators. And that is how it should be because the military’s job is to defend the people against internal and/or external aggression.

2. The demonstrations in Egypt and Tunisia were about winning back God-given human rights – including dignity, liberty and equality that have been trampled by political inequities and injustices. Human rights are inalienable. They are God-given and not privileges given and taken back by leaders. Therefore human rights cannot be taken away by anybody. Leaders in Tunisia and Egypt who trampled peoples’ human rights were resisted and defeated.

3. We warmly congratulate the demonstrators in both countries.

4. The wind of change that marked the start of Africa’s de-colonization process in the late 1950s and early 1960s is upon us once again. Southern Sudan is now liberated. Tunisia and Egypt have just gotten rid of dictators and many countries are agitating for change.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda voters should not sell their birthright for a kilo of salt

This 2011 election will save or destroy Uganda. Re-electing Museveni will change Uganda as we have known it – make no mistake about it. The trajectory is very clear. Museveni is already negotiating with foreigners to sell Uganda’s land – the deal with Egypt is in final stages of finalization.

When Roman food crop producing peasants were forced to sell their land to large scale farmers, the latter switched from food crops for peasant consumption to grazing cattle and sheep or growing grapes and olives for rich families. Rome’s population declined in part from high mortality rate of impoverished, hungry and sick peasants. The weakened Rome was invaded and conquered by barbarians.

Similarly, through the sale of Uganda’s land to foreigners who will then grow foodstuffs to feed their own people, Uganda peasants will dwindle and be replaced by ‘invaders’ through East African economic integration and political federation. This is not a joke. The brilliant, dynamic and jovial children that Uganda has known will be gone as education standards decline and child malnutrition and associated diseases take its toll.

Read the full post
Posted on by

The Application of western concept of stability in Uganda needs recasting

The people of Uganda have really suffered all sorts of injustices – economic, social and environmental – in large part because of western advice to Uganda governments on how to establish and maintain economic and political stability. Britain’s rejection of Obote’s “Move to the Left” and nationalization of industries resulted in his overthrow in 1971 and the installation of Amin. The suffering of the people of Uganda during this period is too well known to be repeated here. But this was considered a period of stability and Amin continued to enjoy support from some western countries until he was overthrown in 1979 apparently with British involvement (New African June 2007).

Since 1981 (except a three year period from 1984 to 1986) Uganda has implemented structural adjustment policies which call for macroeconomic stability. Although macroeconomic stability means many things including balanced budgets, in Uganda it has come to mean controlling inflation to 5 percent per annum. To maintain this economic stability, money supply in Uganda’s economy has been controlled including through raising interest rates. High and variable interest rates of up to 30 percent have discouraged borrowing by small and medium enterprises and investing in labor-intensive enterprises. Many entrepreneurs who ventured and borrowed were not able to repay. They either defaulted or sold their assets including land and/or livestock or married off their daughters at very tender ages to repay the loans that left them worse off.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda must end rule by force and foreigners

Uganda which is blessed by human and natural endowments has failed to develop because of conflicts and foreign interference going as far back as the interaction of different ethnic groups in what later became Uganda (for example, Arab slave traders with European weapons helped Bahororo to defeat indigenous peoples in southwest Uganda). Slave trade, religious, regional, colonial and post-colonial wars created animosities that have torn the country apart and the situation is getting worse under Museveni. Instead of creating a foundation for peace, stability and prosperity for all, we are engaged in zero-sum games. Trust among Ugandans has dissipated as state informers have penetrated every aspect of our being. We are even beginning to get scared of our own shadows (I am confident that out of this fear will emerge courage to liberate ourselves).

The king of Buganda invited European missionaries because he was afraid of Muslim influence coming from the east and the north of his kingdom. He thought different religious groups would neutralize one another and leave him alone to govern his people in peace. Within a short time the three groups (Muslims, Protestants and Catholics) were at each other’s throat and fought one another and together or separately fought and forced the king into exile in Seychelles. When Protestants and Catholics turned on each other, Captain Lugard stepped in on the Protestant side and helped defeat Catholics. The Protestants since then (until Museveni came to power with Catholics in 1986) worked closely with the colonial administration to promote their interests at the expense of Muslims and Catholics.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Comparison between Museveni and British colonial chiefs in Uganda

The comments and questions I am receiving from readers of my books and blog have rekindled hope that Uganda might exit from the current neo-colonial, private sector dominated and market oriented model to a truly poverty-reduction paradigm based on building viable and lasting institutions and infrastructure (rather than governments and individual leaders) and promoting public and private partnership. But for this to happen, leaders in Uganda must have a different political economy profile from those in power today.

Museveni has failed the people of Uganda and pleased his western sponsors because he has had two conflictingstrategies. On the one hand, he has told Ugandans the right things such as transformation of Uganda’s economy through industrialization and improving the living standards of all Ugandans etc. On the other hand, he has in practice implemented what western powers have demanded – integrating Uganda into a global market economy embodied in the Washington Consensus (WC) similar to what Britain demanded during the colonial period. The WC model requires Uganda leadership to adopt policies and strategies similar to those in the colonial days under the indirect rule system. In essence Museveni has behaved like an indirect rule chief under the direction of western powers including the World Bank, IMF and especially Britain. Let us review a few examples to show that Museveni has served western and not Ugandan interests.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Explaining the unique importance of 2011 elections in Uganda

Let me make two observations at the start of this article to clear the air. In my writings I have referred to Museveni as president, not in his personal capacity. Second, you cannot meaningfully talk about NRM government without talking about Museveni – for all intents and purposes Museveni has become NRM government. I do not hear much from ministers or senior civil servants. And in the absence of a government spokesperson, we are left with Museveni.

In a month’s time, Ugandans will elect a president, members of parliament, district councilors and mayors. These elections are taking place in unique circumstances which voters must be very familiar with before they cast their votes. Voters must therefore choose leaders that will genuinely represent their interests. The last twenty five years were dominated by structural adjustment (macroeconomic stability) and national security (defense of the state from external threats) at the expense of human security (protection of individuals economically and socially).

Read the full post
Posted on by

Museveni has begun metamorphosing Uganda into a new landscape

If we Ugandans do not put our act together quickly, we are going to lose Uganda as we have known it. Museveni who began preparations as early as 1965 (Bahororo failure to get a separate district in Ankole at independence and political ascendancy of Bairu in Ankole disturbed him) came to power with a clear mission known to himself and his inner core of Bahororo people – (1) the ascendancy of Bahororo in Uganda’s political economy and great lakes region (Tutsi Empire), and (2) metamorphosis of Uganda into a new landscape.

Museveni was also aware that these transformations would take a long time to be realized. That is why he initially asked for a fifteen year mandate which has turned out to be inadequate. During an interview on New Year’s Day (2011), Museveni declined to indicate when he would quit Uganda’s political stage. The impression he gave left no doubt that he is still around for a while possibly by force should Ugandans refuse to re-elect him. What he has not admitted is that he thought (wrongly) that he would quickly trample on Ugandans through wars and impoverishment and reduce them to insignificant vulnerable minority and transform Uganda into a new landscape ecologically, economically, demographically and politically without difficulty. Ugandans have turned out to be resilient in the face of wars, pandemics, epidemics and impoverishment and are still kicking with considerable force that cannot be ignored.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Britain has caused too much trouble and suffering in Uganda

Since John Hanning Speke (later described as a patronizing and incompetent man who wrote detailed reports on unfamiliar terrain {H. Hanbury-Tenison 2010}) set foot on what later became Uganda in mid-19th century, Britain has caused too much trouble and suffering to the people of Uganda because of its biased racial, economic, military, ethnic, refugee and political approaches. The following are illustrative highlights of British biased actions.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Why has Museveni’s birth place issue resurfaced?

Without realizing it, Uganda has entered two somewhat related phases: the enlightenment phase and the dialectics phase. The enlightenment phase involves reasoning: asking questions and demanding convincing answers. The dialectics phase means that Ugandans are scrutinizing Museveni statements like never before to demonstrate that the truth of his intentions is in that he does not say. In other words, Ugandans are trying to make the absent the present because the greater part of the truth is in that which is absent.

Based on his actions during and since the guerrilla war a rapidly increasing number of Ugandans have concluded that Museveni is a foreigner whose intentions are to marginalize indigenous Ugandans economically, demographically and politically working in close cooperation with foreigners especially Britain, Uganda’s neocolonial master.

The following harsh actions (some of them repeated for easy reference) taken by Museveni are used as illustrations that only a foreigner can impose on a people he does not belong to.

Read the full post
Posted on by