Lack of justice has condemned Uganda to a state of fear and conflict

Ugandans are justifiably engaged in debates, conferences and diplomatic outreach activities in search of a permanent solution to the daunting political economy challenges. They are calling for unity and removal of NRM from power as the first step towards realizing justice for all.

Justice simply means fairness and equal opportunity for all. And justice goes with liberty, democracy, dignity and happiness. Uganda’s challenges at home and within the East African context originate principally from the absence of justice that has bred fear of domination and exploitation. Justice has not been served since different communities were pooled together in what became Uganda.

Policies adopted to conquer, administer and exploit Uganda’s resources introduced an unjust system. Individuals, groups or regions were rewarded or punished for various reasons; the indirect rule system created rulers and ruled. A system of economic growth centers and cheap labor reserves and discrimination in recruiting soldiers created regional imbalances. The desire to create tribal units for administrative convenience lumped people together in an unequal relationship.

Uganda has failed because of lack of tested leaders

Uganda has everything except good, dedicated, tested and patriotic leaders. When someone suddenly jumps out of a ‘corn field’ onto a political stage and then quickly becomes head of state chances are that that country will experience tremendous difficulties.

Look at Uganda since independence in 1962. Uganda People’s Congress (UPC) and Kabaka-Yekka (KY) political parties were formed virtually on the eve of independence, allowing no time to test the leaders. The UPC/KY alliance was a marriage of convenience – not of conviction to unite and lead Uganda to greatness. The alliance was hurriedly put together for the sole purpose of preventing Democratic Party (DP) from forming a government at independence. In this rush thorny issues like the head of state and ‘lost counties’ which could have prevented formation of a UPC/KY alliance were not resolved before independence. The rush gave us a complex constitution with serious repercussions. What happened after independence did not surprise those who followed the negotiations in London or who knew the ideological differences between UPC and KY leaders. We ended up with 1966 catastrophe, a pigeon-hole constitution and Amin in 1971.

Banyankole are not responsible for the suffering in Uganda

Accusations have increased in frequency and intensity that Banyankole have primary responsibility for the suffering being experienced in Uganda, implying punitive measures when the time comes. There were reports that after the brutal manner in which the demonstrators were handled in Kampala in 2009 by security forces, some people vowed that Banyankole would pay a commensurate price including innocent ones that had nothing to do with the disproportionate use of force. Anybody coming from southwest Uganda has been defined as a Munyankole and some of them have been assaulted. Banyankole are therefore wondering on which side to stand: with a tiny group of rulers from Ankole who are causing the chaos and suffering in Uganda or those who are opposed but have vowed to punish any Munyankole when the time comes.

Warnings have gone out that those who accuse Banyankole either in their individual capacity or as representatives of groups should check their facts first to avoid harming innocent people. Southwest Uganda has a complex history of rulers and ruled and of immigrants especially since the late 1950s who pose as Banyankole or Bakiga. We therefore need to know who is who from southwest Uganda and who is doing what. Without this disaggregated information innocent Banyankole and Bakiga or their properties may end up in trouble for nothing.

Uganda: stop war mongering, negotiate genuine peace

When people are oppressed and depressed as Ugandans are there is a natural tendency to want to use any means including force to end their suffering and punish those (real or imaginary) that caused them pain. In moments like this they forget to gauge the strength of opponents or determine where they are weakest. They act on the spur of the moment, in a hurry or in anger and forget to organize and strategize properly under able leadership or even to estimate total costs on their side. Sometimes they misread what is happening around them as German peasants did during Martin Luther agitation against the church, hoping he would support their cause. They were wrong and paid a heavy price.

Resolving Uganda challenges will require partnership and a level playing field

What Ugandans want that has been denied by NRM government is recognized by the international community and the African Union (AU) both of which Uganda is a member. The United Nations Millennium Declaration of 2000 and the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance of 2007 state very clearly what Ugandans are struggling for against stiff NRM resistance. Here is a sample of what we mean.

Regarding freedom that has been denied to Ugandans, the Millennium Declaration states: “Men and women have the right to live their lives and raise their children in dignity, free from hunger and from the fear of violence, oppression or injustice. Democratic and participatory governance based on the will of the people best ensures these rights” Regarding equality that Ugandans do not enjoy, the Declaration states: “No individual and no nation must be denied the opportunity to benefit from development. The equal rights and opportunities of women and men must be assured”. On tolerance that is a very rare commodity in Uganda, the Declaration states: “Human being must respect one another, in their diversity of belief, culture and language. Differences within and between societies should be neither feared nor repressed, but cherished as a precious asset of humanity. A culture of peace and dialogue among all civilizations should be actively promoted”. On respect for nature which has been trampled in Uganda, the Declaration states: “Prudence must be shown in the management of all living species and natural resources, in accordance with the precepts of sustainable development”.

“It is better to reform than to have a political revolution” – lessons for Uganda

During the debate leading up to the Reform Act of 1832, Thomas B. Macaulay a Whig member of British Parliament made a memorable observation: “It is better to reform than to have a political revolution”. The successful 1830 revolution in France sounded a warning about what could happen in England if the middle class and industrial leaders’ demands for participation in the political process were not addressed. The Whigs who won the 1830 general elections “realized that concessions to reform were superior to revolution”. An election reform bill was introduced and became the Reform Act in 1832. The law gave explicit recognition to the changes that accompanied the Industrial Revolution including creation of the working class. The Reform Act of 1832 together with repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 saved Britain from the 1848 revolutions that swept across Europe. The working class demands that were not accommodated in the Reform Act were taken care of in the second half of the 19th century.

Religion has pivotal role in Uganda’s development

If the NRM government had done what it promised in its ten-point program, we would not be discussing the role of religion in Uganda’s development and politics. But since 1987 when it launched structural adjustment, the government left economic growth and distribution of benefits to market forces and trickle down mechanism and concentrated on building and consolidating security forces and engaging in regional and international ventures. By 2009 the government realized that the economy and society did not do well under structural adjustment and abandoned the model. Economies in success story countries like South Korea and Singapore grew at an average rate of ten percent for decades with state participation. And economic benefits were shared equitably. In Uganda, economic growth has fallen far short of ten percent. And the benefits have disproportionately gone to the few families that were already rich and are boasting in public, leaving the bulk of Ugandans trapped in absolute poverty, unemployment, sickness, functional illiteracy and hunger. Desperate Ugandans are flocking to their churches in search of relief. Therefore religious leaders have an obligation to act including calling on the government to take appropriate action. NRM government, instead of listening and collaborating with religious institutions to find a lasting solution, has begun accusing them of engaging in anti-government subversive activities thereby dragging them into confrontational politics.

Uganda: when you’re afraid of failure you will never make progress

Many Ugandans are very unhappy about the deteriorating situation in our country. However, they are unable to react because they are afraid that if they don’t succeed in regime change or make fundamental changes within NRM the consequences might be severe. They are therefore prepared to wait until time solves the problem or someone else does it for them. That is why some Ugandans are praying virtually daily for donors to come to our rescue. In life there are few, if any, improvements that occur without human involvement and sometimes sacrifices. Intervention by others is more often than not to promote or fulfill parochial agendas that could lead to more hardship for the non-participants in the process. Therefore in order to solve a problem those affected need to participate. Second, success or failure depends upon the goal one sets. For example, those who had planned to unseat NRM regime in 2011 elections and didn’t obviously failed. Those who criticized NRM economic policy succeeded because the government dropped the devastating structural adjustment program in 2009 based on the invisible hand of market forces and replaced it with National Development Plan designed to introduce a public-private partnership model. Third, there are goals that are achieved in stages. You start with producing and disseminating information in the news papers, radios and the internet as Ugandans are doing now. The information is then debated and synthesized into policy and strategy in the second phase. In the third phase the strategy is implemented. Implementation may not achieve all the goals or none at all. The momentum may be slowed or the movement even destroyed completely. History provides lessons we can draw from so that when we do not succeed or do so partially the first time we should not despair and throw in the towel. In some of my publications, I have deliberately drawn on history lessons to show that those that persist and are optimistic win in the end. Below are some lessons that discourage pessimism and defeatism.

Why Uganda’s economic growth hasn’t ended poverty

During the guerrilla war and immediately after capturing power in 1986 Yoweri Museveni wrote and spoke regularly and passionately about his determination to end the long suffering of all the people of Uganda. He condemned previous governments for indulging in luxuries while Ugandans languished in poverty, hunger, illiteracy and suffered all sorts of health problems including jiggers. He promised that every Ugandan would wear shoes, go to school, eat balanced meals and get treated when sick. At international conferences, summits, press conferences and interviews Museveni articulated unambiguously his administration’s policies of ending neo-colonialism and pre-industrial culture; of industrializing the economy within fifteen years and protecting industries against unfair competition and of state intervention in Uganda’s economy “because, in reality, there is no such thing as a free market. There is always intervention at some stage”(Africa Forum Volume 1. No.2, 1991). The overall outcome of these policies was to lift Ugandans out of their miserable living conditions. He emphasized that the policy of his administration was not to reduce but eradicate poverty. His ideas were indeed revolutionary and he received long applause. Reporters followed him wherever he went and Museveni enjoyed it. I was there in Addis Ababa and New York where he spoke and I witnessed it all.

Museveni has to be flexible to save Uganda

Museveni as Uganda leader has to recognize before it is too late that Uganda belongs to all of us. His notions that Uganda is his because he fought and won and that he cannot be thrown out of the house like a chicken should be dropped without further delay. He is not going to keep the opposition out in the cold forever because the laws of nature do not work that way. Museveni knows how it feels to be kept out of government by illegitimate means. He went to the bush to change all of that. But he has since 1996 done exactly what he opposed and caused him to fight a five year destructive guerrilla war on somebody else’s territory mostly in Buganda without commensurate compensation. He should not for a moment think he has monopoly to wage war against illegitimate governments. Others can do so and succeed as he did. But Uganda does not have to go that far again.