“If things change, I change my opinion” – John Maynard Keynes

In Uganda things have changed in the political, economic, social and environmental areas since NRM came to power in 1986. The leaders whether under pressure or voluntarily genuinely changed their opinion to match the changes that had taken place in Uganda and at the global level. In 1987 they abandoned the ten point development model and replaced it with a fundamentally different model of structural adjustment which came into force in May 1987. In 2009, structural adjustment model was declared dead. In line with the global economic wind of change, NRM government announced it had changed its opinion and abandoned structural adjustment and replaced it with Five Year National Development Plan (NDP). But there was no fundamental change in content. The core elements of structural adjustment remained intact – macroeconomic stability and limited state intervention in Uganda’s economy. This was a tactical change to hoodwink Ugandans ahead of 2011 presidential and parliamentary elections. So, one can fairly conclude that since 1987 while things have changed considerably government opinion and practice have remained virtually intact. Is it possible for NRM to change its opinion commensurate with the changes that have taken place since 1987? It is unlikely and this is why, beginning with the president.

Uganda has grossly underutilized capable, experienced professionals

Ugandans opposed to the failed NRM regime have begun a radical assessment (misinterpreted by some as trying to cause trouble) to get to the root of Uganda’s development challenges in order to offer appropriate recommendations including in skilled labor to get Uganda out of the political economy trap. We are beginning to behave like good medical doctors who will prescribe medication after they have identified the root cause of the illness. Let us examine the root cause of lack of skilled labor in Uganda.

Often Uganda’s underdevelopment has been defined in terms of lack of trained and experienced human capital to be eased by implementing a liberal immigration policy of very expensive professionals from neighboring countries and beyond. Although the colonial administration did not train sufficient numbers, a qualified cadre of civil service staff was trained for district and to a lesser extent central government. Obote I government increased training in quantity and quality in the 1960s. The political crisis from 1971 to 1986 resulted in many of them dead and most of the rest fleeing into exile where they got employed and improved their skills through further study and/or work experience. Those who stayed at home either took a low profile in towns or disappeared into the countryside where they engaged in subsistence agriculture to survive. These sad developments opened the door for ignorant and inexperienced staff mostly mercenaries to take charge of Uganda which they looted mercilessly and disappeared with their loot in 1979.

On school lunch Besigye is right, Museveni is wrong

In Uganda the idea of school lunch is very popular throughout the country. If Besigye who supports it musters the right skills and sells it, it could carry him shoulder high to state house in 2011!

There is indisputable evidence from developed and developing countries that school lunches work. They increase attendance especially of girls (which is in line with MDG 2 on universal primary education) and improve performance. Children from poor families are less likely to attend school than those from rich ones in part because of lack of school lunch.

In fact, in Uganda over 80 percent of children drop out of primary school largely for lack of school feeding programs. Studies from Kabale district have confirmed high dropout for lack of school meals. On the other hand studies from Ruhiira in southwest Uganda where school lunches are provided attendance and performance have improved significantly.

Museveni must therefore have other reasons for rejecting government support for school lunches for children from poor families that cannot afford to bring packed lunch from home.

How educating girls can contribute to Uganda’s demographic transition

Authorities and development partners are worried that Uganda’s population ‘explosion’ (which has been exaggerated as one of the highest in the world which is not true because there are countries with over four percent versus Uganda’s 3.2 percent growth rate which has remained stable for decades) will constrain economic growth, social progress and aggravate environmental degradation. If Uganda’s economy is growing at an average annual rate of 6 percent and projected to increase and population at 3 percent and projected to decline albeit slowly then population growth will not fundamentally undermine economic growth. Poverty is high because of skewed income distribution in favor of a few rich families connected with the first family and in-laws. Rural environment has been damaged largely by reckless extensive agriculture and draining wetlands that leads to clearance of large swathes of vegetation and commercial ranches owned by few rich families as in Kabale and Nyabushoz districts. Urban decay has been caused basically by mismanagement, corruption and lack of planning.

Dear Joe

Thank you for your comment on Tutsi Empire project that appeared in my remarks in Observer this week. The idea of Tutsi Empire is not new. It has been raised at national, regional and international levels. If you have been following the debate on this subject and history of relations between Batutsi and Bahutu and Bahororo and Bairu you will understand why the possibility of Tutsi Empire is alarming.

The donor community has expressed concern about this project. Problems between Museveni and the West (donors) began when Museveni dreamt of a Tutsi empire and together with Kagame invaded DRC. The donor mood towards Uganda changed (Business in Africa April 2001). President Mugabe was drawn into DRC war primarily to prevent the establishment of Tutsi Empire in Middle Africa (J. N. Weatherby 2003). During my mission to DRC, Rwanda and Burundi early this year, the region was full of talk about the imminent establishment of Tutsi Empire and I reported this in my article in Observer. Many commentators are of the view that it will be achieved by military, political or economic means. So when Museveni pushes the E.A. Political Federation many think he has Tutsi Empire in mind. And Museveni has not denied it.

Museveni came to power with a hidden agenda which he has executed

On October 23, 2010, I wrote that I had closed a chapter began in 1961 about Uganda’s political economy. The focus of that chapter was to analyze political economy challenges. Now, I am embarking on another one that will state a specific problem and suggest solutions. I will begin with the compelling case of Museveni’s hidden agenda – to promote Bahororo/Batutsi/Bahima dominance from southwest region to the national level – how he crafted and has implemented it without the majority of Ugandans realizing it.

Museveni began preparing his political career while at Ntare School in the early 1960s based largely on local (Ankole) politics. He realized that independence in Ankole (Museveni’s home base) based on majority rule of Bairu (slaves) led by Protestant elites was dangerous for minority Bahororo/Bahima (also Protestants) supremacy. The abolition of kingdoms including in Ankole by Obote – a Protestant, northerner and commoner – was bad news because it removed the institutional shelter that had protected Bahima and Bahororo minority rulers for centuries. Museveni developed a political strategy based on military and religious strength complemented by external forces. But he knew very early on that ultimately what would count most in his rise to power was military strength, not democracy. Religious divisions and external help would supplement military strength.

Bahima and their culture of winner takes all

To understand why corruption has reached an unprecedented level in Uganda’s history and there are no signs that it is subsiding, Ugandans and their development partners need to understand the pastoral culture of Uganda’s present leaders. From time immemorial pastoralists including Batutsi, Bahima and Bahororo (Batutsi from Rwanda) live in hostile environments marked by shortages of pasture and water, droughts, epidemics like the 1890s rinderpest, bovine diseases and cattle theft.

In the Great Lakes Region pastoralists lived in fragile ecosystems which rendered them vulnerable and forced them to engage in fighting for survival. Most of the wars in the region since the arrival, in the 16th century, of the Nilotic Luo-speaking Bahima and their Batutsi and Bahororo cousins have been related to land and cattle. They have fought to expand territory and increase their herds, dispossessing the losers. Accordingly, they developed a mentality of winner takes all which has been carried over into governments in Uganda and Rwanda.

Contradictions in Uganda’s development policy

As we enter the second decade of the 21st century, Ugandans need to take stock of how far they have come and decide on where they want to go. Since the NRM government came to power in 1986, its development record has been characterized by three major factors – overdependence on foreign advisers, abrupt and major shift in development policy (from ten-point program to the Washington Consensus and since September 2009 to economic development planning). I have written on the first two factors and posted the articles on my blog www.kashambuzi.com. In this article we shall focus on contradictions which give the impression of failure to design policy on some issues or lack of collective responsibility.

Before NRM captured power, its cadres from different development backgrounds had debated and reached a consensus on policies contained in the ten-point program. Until July 1987 when the government launched the structural adjustment program, government representatives spoke with one voice.

Since July 1987, many government representatives have contradicted one another giving an indication of lack of harmony in policy making and collective responsibility. Let us review a few examples.

Ethnic relations in the Great Lakes region are antagonistic

Let me begin with two statements.

First, when my article on “How Rujumbura’s Bairu got impoverished” appeared in (Uganda) Observer, some Uganda readers were convinced that I was sectarian and hated Bahororo (another name for Batutsi who sought refuge in Rujumbura when the short-lived Mpororo kingdom disintegrated and Rwanda and Nkore troops moved in). Since 1986, Uganda government has been led by Bahororo many of them from Rujumbura or with roots in Rujumbura. With Uganda currently experiencing un-preceded poverty, hunger, unemployment, marginalization and functional illiteracy, many Ugandans have revisited the above article and drawn parallels with how the whole country of Uganda has been impoverished.

Second until the 1960s, the history of the Great Lakes Region was dominated by followers of J. H. Speke, C. G. Seligman – British explorer and academic, respectively – and African scholars mostly from aristocratic families who shared the two British biased opinions led by Alexis Kagame, a Catholic priest and historian associated with Rwanda royal court. The writings of these people were extremely biased in favor of Batutsi (Bahima, Bahororo and Banyamulenge are clans of Batutsi) who were described as white or black Caucasian, intelligent, well built, civilized, wealthy through invasion and plunder of Negroes and born to rule. On the other hand they portrayed Bantu-speaking people (dubbed Bairu and Bahutu {slaves or servants} by Bahima) as reported by J. H. Speke (1863, 2006) as black Negroes, without a civilization, poorly built or ugly and short, unintelligent and born to serve the rulers. They used these racist and psychological instruments to rob Bantu-speaking people of their true identity, civilizations and wealth and reduced them to servants or serfs as in Rwanda.