We are writing these stories, incredible or controversial as they may be, for the sole purpose of finding a lasting solution to Uganda’s daunting challenges so that all Ugandans have peace and stability in which to create wealth and enjoy happiness. This requires a comprehensive understanding of the history of Uganda and philosophy of our leaders. Those who reason that going into history is unnecessary or counterproductive and we should therefore forget about it and move on forget that the past impacts the present in significant ways. There are also those who argue that we should not focus on one leader but the institution. They too forget that history is full of examples of one man rule who decides what to do and how to do it and the rest just toe the line or get sidelined or fired or worse if they don’t. Therefore understanding Uganda’s problems begs a comprehensive analysis of its history and the philosophy of its leaders. Failure to understand Amin as a man of split personality with a brutal past and medical problem resulted in some 300,000 loss of lives in the 1970s.
Studying or reporting about President Yoweri Museveni has been made very difficult by a set of circumstances. He came to power at a time when Uganda was going through difficult political economy times and Ugandans wanted anybody that could turn the country around. So Museveni took advantage of that and made decisions that would have been strongly opposed. He also had strong backing of western powers and reporters that showered him with praises such as an intellectual who picked up the gun to save his country, a bold leader who is not afraid of taking risks and who does not tolerate dissent and a knowledgeable individual who understands everything including history, geography and in particular the military. For these reasons he was christened darling of the west who regularly attended annual G8 Summits (club of the eight most powerful industrialized countries in the world), dean of a new breed of African leaders in favor of democracy, presidential time limits, private sector development and market forces as engines of economic growth and equitable distribution of benefits, and a peacemaker in the Great Lakes region.
Behind these walls of protection, Museveni launched rule of the jungle in Uganda and the Great Lakes region where the strongest gets what it wants and the weakest succumbs or gets crushed. There are many illustrations in all areas of human activity where Museveni decided virtually unilaterally and caused too much suffering. And we have to keep reminding ourselves even at the risk of repetition of what has happened since 1986 as a basis for changing the rules of the game.
First, soon after capturing power Museveni needed money. Against advice even of powerful foreigners he imposed a 30 percent service charge for converting old into new currency. This was a huge drain on savings especially for retired citizens who did not have another source of earning a living. This decision is likely to have impacted life expectancy of those who could not adjust. It is not clear whether Museveni accounted for this money: how much was generated and on what sectors it was spent.
Second, he chose to privatize Uganda’s assets without determining which ones are of strategic and national security importance and must remain in the public domain. He began privatizing without a comprehensive analysis of which public enterprises needed management changes rather than outright privatization or which ones were making profits and should be spared. The purpose of privatization was to generate government revenue, improve efficiency and serve as an engine of growth and job creation. Ugandans including Members of Parliament who have responsibility for setting national policy including on privatization and passing laws leant about privatization of Uganda enterprises from foreign newspapers. Again it is not clear how much revenue was generated and to what use it was put.
Third, Museveni refused advice on the social impact of structural adjustment especially in three key areas. He refused to listen to or hear advice that trickledown economics has never worked anywhere and would not work in Uganda. What we have ended up with is trickle up of benefits of economic growth whereby the rich have become richer and the poor poorer. He refused advice on the wisdom of balancing food production for domestic consumption and for export. Uganda has ended up exporting food that was traditionally produced for domestic consumption such as beans, maize and fish. Thanks to the British colonial administration fisheries including fish ponds (fish farming) were developed to supply an affordable source of protein to low income families. Under Museveni’s regime fisheries have become one of the main earners of foreign currency but at great cost to Uganda consumers. Export of fish and beans has deprived Ugandans of affordable source of protein an essential component in body growth, protection and repair. Overall food exports have reduced supplies in the domestic markets, raised prices beyond the means of many households, leading to acute malnutrition and diseases associated with it. In Uganda with its abundance, no child or elderly should die of malnutrition. That malnutrition is happening in Uganda and has become endemic is a gross violation of the right to food. Food shortages have also impacted adversely on capital human formation as brain development to full size has been impaired and students are dropping out of school because they are hungry. The president has refused to subsidize school lunch when there is overwhelming support for it in Uganda and in Africa as agreed in NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) resolution. This is a clear case of rule of the jungle.
Fourth, Museveni has refused advice that complete liberalization of Uganda’s economy is suicidal especially in relation to industrialization. No country has developed without a dynamic industrial sector. Even developed countries that had switched to services at the expense of industries have realized that that was a mistake and are correcting it with re-industrialization of their economies. World Trade Organization (WTO) has room for countries to take measures to protect domestic industries in case of unfair competition. In Uganda the import of cheap or subsidized products such as clothes has unfairly damaged the textile industry and eroded forward and backward linkages essential for Uganda’s economic and social transformation. But Museveni has not budged. As a result de-industrialization has crippled Uganda’s economy.
Let us turn to politics. Museveni came to power fully determined to frustrate democracy in terms of free and fair elections contested on a multiparty basis. He decided to rule the country at gun point. He therefore invested heavily in instruments of repression hoping that he would use them to suppress dissent indefinitely. Museveni has threatened to return to the bush if the status quo is changed. Another one threatening to go to the bush to change the status quo as he did in 1981 would get arrested and charged with treason punishable by death. Since he agreed to have elections beginning in 1996 all have been rigged in his favor. The 2011 elections represent a clear case of a leader who gets what he wants. He insisted on having a non-independent electoral commission and got away with it. He invaded the treasury and central bank and got all the money he needed including donor money for development purposes and got away with it. He then formed the largest cabinet in Uganda’s history to be paid in part by donor money and got away with it.
But in life no situation is permanent. Events ultimately come to an end. And Museveni’s is approaching an end. There is a documentary about the struggle between monkeys and a lion for control of territory which is very interesting and Ugandans should draw lessons from it. One day a full grown lion strayed into an area occupied by monkeys. The monkeys were so disturbed about invasion of their territory and decided to act. They all, young and old, male and female and from different tribes by their physical features gathered around the lion and made so much noise that the lion felt threatened and took off. The lesson for Ugandans is that in order to send Museveni home we need to come together: soldier, police, intelligence officer, priest, youth, gender, parties and groups at home and abroad. The monkeys succeeded only because they came together under one leader and shouted in unison and chased the lion away.
The second piece of good news is that the donor community that had turned a blind eye and was narrowly focused has now come to realize that something has gone wrong in Uganda and has to be corrected before it is too late. Donors are either cutting back or redirecting development funds to non-state actors. They are also demanding democracy and good government and an end to rampant corruption and sectarianism. In particular they are stressing an independent electoral commission, presidential term limits, separation of powers especially independence of the judiciary and absence of the military in the electoral process. This is a revolution! Museveni did not expect a shift in the rule of the jungle in his lifetime and may try to resist the change. It is now up to Ugandans to seize the opportunity and use it wisely for the benefit of all.
.