What triggers military coups or popular revolts?

By and large – and with reference to Africa – military coups and/or popular revolts occur for the following reasons.

1. When a government under the same leader and key cabinet members stay in power too long. They lose value. It is like wearing the same shirt or skirt or eating the same food every day. People get tired and want a change – sometimes any change. This is what happened with Haile Selassie of Ethiopia, Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, Ben Ali of Tunisia, and Hosni Mubarak of Egypt.

2. When the national army feels that it is losing power to the presidential or imperial guard, the former steps in and removes the head of state and the government. In Ghana, the 1966 military coup against Mkrumah and his government was prompted, inter alia, by Mkrumah’s building a strong President’s Own Guard Regiment (POGR) and his attempt to party-ize the military. Both ideas were unpopular with the Ghanaian military officer corps. Although the coup was led by a small number of middle-ranking officers, they had the tacit support of the majority of the officer corps and senior commanders of the police.

What is needed for a demonstration to succeed?

Greetings fellow Ugandans and friends

The following requirements must be met in whole or in part for a demonstration, revolt or revolution to succeed.

1. There must be deep-seated, long-held grievances that translate into sufficient frustration and anger for change.

2. The goal must be clearly defined. The Peasant Revolt of 1381 in England was against feudal exploitation and war costs. The mob in Paris in 1789 was a protest against poverty, unemployment and rising cost of living. The Peasants in the French Revolution were against feudal exploitation and injustices. The Cairo Revolution was about unseating Hosni Mubarak.

3. There must be a spark for spontaneous demonstrations. The 1973 famine in Ethiopia sparked Addis Ababa demonstrations, introduction of Afrikaans language in Black schools in South Africa sparked Soweto student uprising, enforcement of a poll tax in England in 1381 sparked peasant uprising in southeast England. These demonstrations and revolts were leaderless and spontaneous precluding application for police permits. This is what is likely to happen in Uganda when peaceful demonstrations occur against illegitimate presidential, parliamentary and local elections.

What to remember in Uganda’s 2011 elections

As we head into the holiday season and the 2011 elections, all Ugandans are being requested for the sake of our children and theirs, to think carefully about which candidates at presidential and parliamentary and lower levels you should vote for. You should not vote for a candidate because he/she is your relative or your friend or your neighbor. Instead, you should vote for a candidate you are convinced will serve the interests of Uganda best. Sitting members of parliament should be rejected or re-elected based on their record. It is better to consider someone who has a public record of service rather than gamble on fresh candidates and you regret later. Age and gender should not be the issue. In your communities you know who can deliver best. You should not be scared because a candidate is wearing a military uniform. In the final analysis they are as vulnerable as we all are.

What kind of revolution was Museveni talking about?

When Museveni graduated from Dar in Tanzania, he began to talk about revolution. This led into the 1981-85 guerrilla war that toppled the government of Okello (not of Obote which was toppled by Okello in July 1985) in January 1986. He continued to talk about revolution. Many Ugandans thought he was talking about the familiar development revolutions: agricultural, industrial and technological. And many gave him support. Museveni suggested that he needed at least 15 years to accomplish this revolution that would in the end metamorphose Uganda’s economy and society.

As time passed, revolutions in agriculture, industry and technology were not happening. While Museveni kept Ugandans waiting for the promised fundamental changes, he embarked on a different kind. Here are a few illustrative cases.

First, he toppled (or it is alleged) governments in Burundi (1993), Rwanda (1994) and Zaire (1997).

Second, Museveni silently handed over Uganda’s economy to foreign ownership, arguing that nationalization was a wrong policy. That is why – justifiably or not – an increasing number of Ugandans think that Museveni is a foreigner working for foreign interests. They reason that a true Ugandan cannot hand over the entire economy except land which he is likely to sell if re-elected.

What Museveni says to Ugandans, leaves out his real goals

A careful reading of Museveni statements and observation of what is happening on the ground show a mismatch. This could not be an accident, it was planned. Museveni never discloses his real intentions. Having realized that the truth was in what Museveni omitted from his statements, I wrote an article a few days ago urging Ugandans to begin to think dialectically: to look for the truth in that which is not said. That is Ugandans should not take Museveni statements at face value.

Museveni studied carefully the minds and aspirations of Ugandans and discovered that what they want is different from what he wants. He chose a two-pronged strategy: make statements about what Ugandans want to hear and implement what he wants to achieve, hence the mismatch noted above. After 25 years of NRM rule, Ugandans see a country in a mess. Not so for Museveni. Keeping Uganda messy, Ugandans drinking too much alcohol and praying the whole night or watching pornography movies etc is helping him to advance his goal towards total domination of the country. Bahororo dominated Bantu/Bairu in southwest Uganda by impoverishing and marginalizing them. This method has been extended to the whole country. That is why you do not hear Museveni expressing regret that children are dropping out of school, Uganda youth are unemployed and poverty has remained unacceptably high. All these adverse developments are in line with what he wants: impoverish and weaken Ugandans and govern them with minimum difficulty. Below are illustrations of contrasts regarding what he preaches and implements.

What happened to Uganda historians?

In many countries, history or civics is a compulsory subject in schools. The idea is that students should know where their ancestors came from, how they have interacted with others over time and how they are governed.

Because Africa was considered a “Dark Continent” at the time of colonization, Europeans assumed it had no history and darkness was not a subject of history. Thus during colonial days, we were taught the history of European explorers and missionaries in Africa. The little Uganda history we were taught was about kings and their royal courts because first colonial and missionary officials came from aristocratic families in Europe and were not interested in peasant or commoners history. The first batch of Uganda historians was either from royal families or connected with the royal court. So for some years after independence, Ugandans continued to be taught the history of royal courts and British work in Uganda.

A new breed of historians emerged after independence led by Prof. B. A. Ogot, Kenyan mathematician turned historian who taught me in Nairobi. They began research into the history of Africans which led “to abandon certain formerly accepted terms and to introduce others”. Uganda historians began to write a new history of Uganda about who Ugandans are, where they came from and where they live and how they have interacted with one another.

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.

Finale: What we have learned about Uganda’s political economy

I have come to the end of a research project that began in 1961 when I was in third year of high school (senior three) at Butobere School in the then Kigezi district. To get a good grasp of the interconnectedness among Uganda’s development variables, I studied Geography, Economics, Demography, International Law and International Relations/Diplomacy, Sustainable Development and History.

My first book came out in 1997 and I have written a total of the following ten books.

1. Critical Issues in African Development (1997)

2. The Paradox of Hunger and Abundance (1999)

3. Africa’s Lost Century (2001)

4. The Failure of Governance in Africa (2003)

5. World Leaders at the UN General Assembly (2008)

6. Uganda’s Development Agenda (2008)

7. Rethinking Africa’s Development Model (2009)

8. Defying Poverty Through Struggle (2009)

9. For Present and Future Generations (2010)

10. Fifty Years Ago (2010).

In 2008, I created a blog www.kashambuzi.com to share information more widely and facilitate debate at the global level with good results so far.

What the next Uganda government must do

I am writing this article on the assumption, inter alia, that:

  1. the new government will muster sufficient political will, genuine and real commitment to raise the standard of living of all Ugandans
  2. Ugandans and their friends and partners will recognize and accept that Uganda is basically an agrarian country dominated by peasants
  3. Ugandans will put the highest priority on meeting the basic needs of food, clothing and shelter
  4. the empowerment of the poor through inter alia mass quality education, healthcare and appropriate technologies will be promoted
  5. external advice however sound will not deliver without support from the nationals
  6. there is a recognition that structural adjustment has been a failure in social and environmental terms and sustaining economic growth
  7. development strategies are home designed, executed and owned
  8. land is life and a basic asset for peasants
  9. the respective roles of the state and the private sector will be redefined in a mutually reinforcing manner
  10. a bottom up approach will be supported through appropriate policies, strategies and institutions