We should thank those individuals and institutions that have brought the issue of EA integration and federation to the center stage in political economy discourse. That this matter is being discussed at all is in itself a step in the right direction. This discourse has brought together people from different schools of thought including theoreticians and practitioners, those who think this is a matter for legislators and not the masses and those who advocate inclusiveness and full participation. What should be made clear at the outset is that there are few, if any, East Africans totally opposed to the EA integration and federation. Differences are about how to get there without leaving anyone behind or disadvantaged. Each participant must realize net benefits.
There are two major reasons why we should pause and reflect on this exercise: (1) Uganda’s current priorities and (2) lessons from integration and federation record.
What Uganda needs right now is to enable households put food on the table, help the unemployed and underemployed find remunerative jobs in decent working conditions, prevent Ugandans from falling sick and when they do have them cured, affordable energy to facilitate economic and social transformation, roads and communications infrastructure to facilitate mobility. These are issues that are better handled at the national level. Given the current economic, social and environmental crisis Uganda should focus at the national level, using regional facilities to enhance progress at that level.
Let us not focus too much attention on articulating theories. Theories need to be adapted to situations on the ground. Those who favor integration emphasize population size, comparative advantage and economies of scale, trickle down benefits and easy mobility on a common passport. Those who emphasize population size leave out the purchasing power component of that population. Poor people however many they are will consume very little. And majority people in East Africa are poor. Thirty considered million middle class people could consume twice the consumption of 60 million peasants. So numbers should be within the purchasing power context. Comparative advantage of the manufactured and raw material type has not worked satisfactorily. Countries that developed industrially rejected comparative advantage in the ‘infant’ stages of development. With Kenya ahead in manufacturing, Uganda will not industrialize unless it protects its infant industries. Trickle down has not worked and will not work under the East African common market. It was supposed to work in Uganda under structural adjustment program from 1987 to 2009. We ended up with a highly skewed income distribution in favor of the rich and declining standards for many in the lowest income bracket. The issue of land ownership should not be touched. This is the main if not only asset and source of livelihood for the majority of Ugandans who are increasingly becoming functionally illiterate and cannot find jobs outside agriculture. When land discussions come up at the East African level, Uganda should opt out.
There is the issue of nationalism linked up with foreign policy and international relations. It is not clear how many Ugandans would trade nationalism for East African citizenship. There are many issues to address especially as more countries (DRC and South Sudan) apply to join the East African Community. Will Uganda disappear? If it does not and should not, how much sovereignty will it surrender and to whom, how much foreign policy will it conduct and will it retain its seat in United Nations organs? Will it continue to raise loans and get grants independently of the federation? Will it surrender monetary policy formulation and national currency?
There are different levels of political development: some are outright dictatorship, others are moving towards democracy, yet others are in between. Do we overlook this important matter for the sake of moving fast to get a federation? By their very nature discussions of integration and federation matters are slow and that is the reason why rigid timetables should not be set. Those who favor federation ahead of integration are putting the cart before the horse or building a house from the roof downwards. Either way there will be serious problems from the start or along the way if we follow this advice.
The issue of a referendum keeps coming up. Elections in Uganda have lost value except for those few that have benefited enormously. And those are the ones who would want a referendum because it would enhance enjoyment of more benefits.
Ugandans should examine vigorously why integration has not worked as expected in EA, NAFTA and EU. “The general atmosphere in the European Union (EU) is filled with uncertainty and fear for the future” (J. V. Overtveldt, 2011).Ugandans should not lose sight of this remark. The record on federation has been very disappointing.
In 1963, the cabinet decided that Uganda should not join the EA federation for the following reasons:
1. Matters affecting the civil service;
2. Seat of the federal capital;
3. Whether to have a single or a bicameral legislature;
4. If there are to be two chambers, what powers would be allowed to each;
5. Disagreement concerning citizenship;
6. Division of powers and responsibilities between federal and state governments;
7. Uganda needed certain guarantees for her future within a larger unit and whom it was surrendering powers to.
Other concerns included:
1. Uganda must be able to retain its seat at the United Nations;
2. Uganda’s sovereignty must be retained;
3. Member-states of a federation must retain their independent powers to raise money abroad;
4. Agriculture (including marketing boards) must remain a responsibility for each member-state;
5. Higher education, trade unions, lands, and mineral resources must be controlled by the individual states;
6. Inter-territorial movement of people [and livestock] must be controlled to protect Uganda against being swamped by Kenya’s urban unemployed [now Rwanda and Burundi which have high population densities and Eastern DRC if it joins];
7. Representatives in the projected federal House of Representatives may be based on appointments;
8. Uganda contends that each member-state must have equal number in the senate.
Many believe these issues are still relevant and need to be addressed first and consensus reached. For these reasons, Uganda leaders and the general public need to rearrange priorities putting first those that are urgent and need attention at the national level.