Tag Archives: uganda

Uganda’s transformation unlikely without industrial protection

Uganda and indeed African countries will not transform their economies and societies without converting their abundant natural resources into manufactured products. The open secret is that they have to protect infant industries against unfair competition. Infant industries are like infant children that require extra care until they have adjusted to the environment and are able to play and compete with others.

In Europe, the first region in the world to develop, protection measures were applied at an early stage. The plague of 1347 that became endemic in Europe reduced population and threatened trade and commerce. “In the non-agricultural sector the most striking result of this crisis was the emerging strength of guilds organized to protect local artisans in response to rapidly declining markets. The strength of the guilds in preserving local monopolies against encroachment from outside competition was frequently reinforced by the coercive power of kings and great lords. On a large scale the Hansean League [a confederation of north German cities] represented such a defensive alliance of cities to protect their shrinking markets from the competition of rival cities”(D. C. North 1981).

Read the full post
Posted on by

British indirect rule in Uganda is still alive and well

The British colonial policy in Uganda was to maximize outcomes for the British people and her industries at minimum cost. Besides strategic interests related to the source of the Nile and Egypt, Britain colonized Uganda to obtain raw materials for her expanding industries, food for her growing population, a market for her surplus manufactured products and a home for her excess population.

After several years of agricultural experimentation with white farmers and informed debate between Entebbe and London colonial officials it was decided that Uganda should be left in the hands of Uganda peasants and loyal chiefs – traditional or appointed – supervised by a few British officials at the central, provincial, district and local levels to ensure that law and order was maintained, taxes were collected and public projects such as roads were constructed.

The cost of governing Uganda would be met from local resources to reduce pressure on the British treasury. Using Buganda as an example of indirect rule model, Chretien (2006) observed that “The kingdom of Buganda was a notable example of the colonial combination of economic calculation, missionary activity, and political strategizing. In this process, the African actors played as decisive a role as the European imperialists”.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Museveni has become a liability to his sponsors

When Museveni was waging his bloody guerrilla war in the early 1980s he gave the impression that he was a uniter in contrast to his predecessors who had been viewed as dividers along sectarian lines. Consequently many Ugandans across the country sponsored his cause.

When he became president in 1986 he formed a cabinet that truly reflected his determination to unify all the people of Uganda. He even defined an economic policy that reflected accommodation of various interests. Then he announced that only individual merit would determine recruitment, assignment, promotion and awarding of scholarships. He advised that political activities would be suspended until national unity had attained a level that sectarianism would not raise its ugly head in Uganda politics. His popularity at home soared!

In May 1987, Museveni’s government entered into a stabilization and structural adjustment agreement with the International Monetary Fund and later with the World Bank. The government adopted the ‘shock therapy’ version of comprehensive and simultaneous implementation of all the elements in the structural adjustment package that was favored by the donor community. “He [Museveni] quickly became the darling of the West when he embraced the IMF/World Bank prescribed Structural Adjustment Programs, cutting down on civil service and social services expenditure and sacrificing state parastatals on the alter of liberalization” (Business in Africa. April 2001).

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda is a military dictatorship disguised as democracy

According to the World Book Encyclopedia, dictatorship is a form of government in which an individual or a committee or other group holds absolute power. Dictators usually have come to power under conditions of turmoil and confusion. Often the dictator seizes power by political trickery or military violence.

Once in control, dictators and their followers retain their positions through force or threat of force. They abolish or closely control the legislature, and quickly suppress freedom of speech, assembly, and the press. They set up an elaborate secret-police system to detect opponents of the government. Persons who object to the dictatorship are persecuted by the government.

On the other hand, democracy is a form of government in which the citizens take part in political decisions that affect them directly or indirectly through their elected representatives. Representatives’ job is to transparently represent the people with whom they made a contract in making decisions about laws and other matters that affect constituents including defending and protecting their rights, freedoms and property.

Uganda as a military dictatorship

Read the full post
Posted on by

Why Uganda’s social and cultural fabric has crashed

Contrary to popular belief that Museveni and his National Resistance Movement (NRM) came to power to end the long suffering of Ugandans, the truth of the matter is that the long suffering has been used as a tool to keep NRM government in power indefinitely. This may sound cruel and unkind or even incredible but sadly it is true.

Museveni, his government and NRM members of parliament soon realized that it is easier to govern poor and vulnerable people because they are helpless and voiceless and can easily be manipulated through persuasion or intimidation or both. Museveni and his group also realized that Uganda elites and donors cannot be easily manipulated or intimidated because they have a voice. Therefore according to Museveni and his team the two groups needed to be accommodated and integrated fully into government actions so that they share credibility for success or responsibility for failure. To stay in power indefinitely two things have happened.

First, in 1986 Museveni created a government of national unity including representatives from all regions, all parties and all faiths. He created a political space for all categories of Ugandans including women, youth, disabled and the private sector etc. The big shots that could not be included in the cabinet, Museveni appointed them as his advisers or gave them other lucrative jobs.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda’s distorted history needs to be corrected

The late Samwiri Karugire (1980) wrote that “To undertake to write a history of a country whose societies are so different, almost in all respects, is a task that imposes its own limitations. This means that the historian has to choose what aspects of history appear to be important and this judgement is inevitably arbitrary in many ways”. Historians should explain why they have taken a particular aspect but they should not distort or even lie.

Until very recently Europeans and Africans who studied and wrote Uganda’s history came from aristocratic families in Europe or were associated with royal courts in Uganda. At the time of Africa’s exploration and colonization, racial prejudice was intense in Europe. In the racial hierarchy Africans (Negroes) were located at the bottom of the pyramid and treated as people who had no history and civilization. Africa was therefore described as a ‘Dark Continent’ and darkness is not a subject of history. Africans were therefore described explicitly as people who lived in a state of savagery and barbarism without social organizations and achievements in arts and sciences.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Why Uganda is implementing a different kind of revolution

The political wing of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) crafted its propaganda message targeting different communities during the bush war. NRM propagandists spoke and wrote about what Baganda and Catholics wanted to hear. They painted the ruling Uganda Peoples Congress (UPC) Party led by Obote as a ‘thief’ that had robbed Buganda of its districts during the referendum on the ‘Lost Counties’ and handed them over to Bunyoro. UPC added an injury to Baganda wounds by overthrowing their kingdom. For Catholics who support the Democratic Party (DP) they focused on the ‘rigged’ 1980 elections that robbed DP of its victory.

To bring to NRM camp a large chunk of UPC supporters, the NRM strategists blamed the suffering of Ugandans, during the Obote II regime in the first half of the 1980s, on the government’s adoption of structural adjustment with its harmful economic and social conditionality and maintenance of a colonial economic structure that condemned Uganda to the production and export of cheap raw materials and import of expensive manufactured products which could be easily produced in Uganda, create jobs and increase incomes.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Uganda’s democracy has become counterproductive

When you talk with people – Ugandans and non-Ugandans – who support the National Resistance Movement (NRM) government led by President Museveni, you are told that Ugandans must be grateful to their leaders because the days of Obote’s and Amin’s dictatorship are over and there is no turning back. They quickly add that Uganda has now become a full-fledged democracy. So what is democracy?

According to the World Book Encyclopedia democracy means rule by the people. It is a form of government that Abraham Lincoln described as “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. According to Robert Maynard Hutchins democracy is the only form of government that is founded on the dignity of man, not the dignity of some men, of rich men, of educated men but of all men (and women).

The citizens of a democracy take part in government either directly or indirectly. In a direct democracy people meet in one place and make the laws for their community. That is what happened in ancient Athens. In a large group it is impossible for all people to meet and pass laws. Consequently they periodically choose representatives to represent their interests. This is indirect or representative democracy.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Why Uganda is in deep trouble

When people engage in human sacrifice, excessive alcohol consumption, unprecedented domestic violence; when men abandon their families, citizens commit suicide, the vulnerable are taken advantage of, security guards arrange to steal property they are guarding, neighbors demand payment to push your car out of a ditch, girls are afraid to go to school for fear of being molested, people attend public functions to steal or cause trouble; when some officials are paid to attend meetings but do not show up in conference halls; officials blame unemployment and poverty on laziness and drunkenness, leaders mislead their people, progress is measured in the number of vehicles in towns, the number of international conferences hosted and officials react to evaluation of their performance by development partners rather than their citizens, then you know there is trouble. I could go on. Uganda has undoubtedly reached this level.

Read the full post
Posted on by

Reconstructing the dynamic history of Uganda’s Bairu

According to John Hanning Speke (1863, 2006) Bairu (a term of abuse) which means slaves was coined by Bahima to apply to all Bantu-speaking people they found south of River Nile.

Presently the term has come to apply to the indigenous Bantu-speaking people of southwest Uganda (in former Ankole district and Rujumbura county of Rukungiri district) because in other areas extensive intermarriage between Bantu and Nilotic peoples formed mixed and entirely new communities. Bantu speaking people brought with them short-horn cattle, goats and sheep and above all iron technology and manufacturing skills (so they were not cultivators only. They were forced into cultivation by Bahima and Bahororo in order to marginalize, impoverish, dominate and exploit them). The term Bahutu is the equivalent of Bairu in Rwanda and Burundi. We shall apply the term Bairu in its broader sense as originally used to include indigenous Bantu speaking people who occupied areas south of Nile River before Nilotic Luo-speaking Bahima arrived and adopted Bantu language.

Read the full post
Posted on by