Uganda is thirsty & hungry for a new beginning

When a new road develops potholes in some sections after a period of intensive traffic use, a complete new surface may not be necessary if the potholes can be repaired in good time. However, as wear and tear takes its toll, large sections of the road become unsafe necessitating a new surface altogether on the entire section of the road. This resurfacing gives the road a new beginning that facilitates smooth, fast and yet safe driving.

Uganda received a new political surface in 1986 with the arrival of NRM system and its government because the political potholes were too many to fill up. The new political landscape permitted Ugandans in some sections of the country to engage in rapid economic growth and poverty reduction reaching a peak in the mid-1990s when the economic growth rate hit ten percent per annum.

Then the political landscape began to develop potholes beginning with signs of sectarianism, corruption and rigging of the 1996 presidential and parliamentary elections. Attempts were made to fill up these political potholes by dismissing and censuring some ministers. Others lost reelection contests. Commissions of inquiry were instituted and institutions were established to restore political order.

Why Museveni will not step down voluntarily

Yoweri Museveni believes very strongly – and he has said so – that he – and his mercenaries from the great lakes region – fought and defeated Ugandans. Therefore Uganda and Ugandans are his properties and he has every right to do what he wants with them such as keeping some Ugandans in the diaspora, appointing over seventy ministers and dividing the country into over 100 districts and still counting as well as giving land away to non-Ugandans.

If he had not been forced by western powers that provide financial, technical and diplomatic support, Museveni would not have accepted elections because conquered people have no right to tell him what to do. Although he accepted elections, he cannot see himself or his National Resistance Movement Organization (NRM) losing an election at the presidential, parliamentary and local levels. And that is why he can defy everybody by refusing to have an independent electoral commission or invade the treasury and central bank (as we are told) and get all the money he wants to bribe voters and disenfranchise others as well as bring in foreigners to vote for him and his party. He has crafted a plan to stay in power indefinitely.

Uganda needs a human rights approach to address poverty

In her article on “Using Human Rights to Reduce Poverty”, Louise Arbour stated that “Poverty is the greatest human rights scourge of our time. Human rights violations are both a cause and consequence of poverty. Human rights are increasingly accepted as part of the definition of what is to be poor, as well as offering pathways out of poverty” (Development Outreach October 2006).

Although Uganda is well endowed in human and natural resources and has received generous international financial and technical support especially since 1987, the poverty level has remained unacceptably high – over 50 percent. One of the arguments for failure to adequately address poverty is that Uganda’s development model has not paid enough attention to human rights issues provided for in various national and international instruments.

In Uganda as in many other countries, focus has since the 1980s largely been on economic growth and price stability hoping that human rights issues such as poverty, food, education, shelter, clothing and health care as well as decent employment would be realized through trickle down mechanism. Sadly, the mechanism has not worked.

The impact of ideological conflicts on Uganda’s stunted development

Discussions of Uganda’s slow development have centered on challenges like rapid population growth, hostile ecological environment and poor governance. While these have had an impact, attention needs also to be directed at ideological conflicts as well. These ideological conflicts have diverted development resources – time, financial and human – to non-developmental activities or led to failure to utilize fully Uganda’s human talent.

Conflicts between Catholics and Protestants denied Catholics to form an independence government in 1962 because Protestants in the UK and those in Uganda were not prepared to relinquish power the chiefs and their relatives had enjoyed since 1894. Qualified Catholics were either sidelined or under-utilized with all implications in loss of morale or reduced incentive to produce to the optimum level. The situation changed with the NRM government since 1986, putting Catholics ahead of some Protestants and repeating the same ideological problem. Many good Protestants are languishing in the ‘dark’. Anti-sectarian law has ensured that little is said about this problem.

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.

If Marcos could go, so can Museveni

Some Ugandans either because they work for Museveni or are not familiar with lessons of political history dismiss the possibility that Ugandans can remove Museveni from power because he enjoys solid international, military and religious support. But this is exactly what former president of the Philippines, the late Ferdinand Marcos enjoyed. What drove Marcos out of power is exactly what has been accumulating in Uganda.

Ferdinand Marcos a firmly unshakeable dictator was elected president in 1965 and reelected for the second and final term in 1969 because of presidential two term limits. Marcos and his wife Imelda did not come from wealthy families. However, Marcos had credentials to do an excellent job as leader of his country. At the time he was elected president his compatriots thought he was a war hero (it turned out to be false) with a good academic record as a lawyer and had been jailed for political reasons. He had also served as an elected member of the House of Representatives and Senate rising to the position of Senate president.

The primacy of nonviolence in Uganda’s regime change should remain our focus

I want to thank commentators on my two articles that appeared in Ugandans at Heart website last week and are still being discussed including on the radio. Exchange of views in a substantive way is a very important first step towards finding a right path to unseat NRM regime. The discussions so far have been civil in tone and hope they will continue that way.

In the two articles an attempt has been made to demonstrate that we should – in the first instance – use nonviolent means to unseat NRM regime (other options are not ruled out) because they minimize costs, unify diverse people and make it relatively easy to bring about national reconciliation. The destructive and divisive experience of wars in Uganda is still fresh in our minds. Wars should therefore be avoided – not ruled out.

Studies have shown that since 1900 three out of four nonviolent campaigns have succeeded (Chenoweth and Staphan 2011). We know that to succeed Ugandan nonviolent campaigners will need support of neighbors and the rest of the international community through for example reducing financial, technical and diplomatic support to NRM regime and imposing targeted sanctions. We should, however, not expect the international community to send troops to Uganda to unseat NRM government unless a situation similar to Libya’s develops whereby Museveni tries to destroy Uganda citizens by military means as Gadaffi tried to do to Libyans.

“War of the flea” tactics will send NRM into extinction

Ugandans with support of friends and well wishers should craft a strategy for defeating NRM that suits local conditions. We should not emulate Egyptians, Tunisians, Philippinos, Ethiopians and Iranians etc if circumstances in Uganda are different. However, we should draw lessons from their struggles. One lesson is very clear: they all overcame fear and sectarianism. Egyptian Muslims joined hands with Christians, for example. Similarly, Ugandans must overcome fear, selfishness and parochialism. We should be guided by modesty and truth, not lies and deception. We should put Uganda and the future of our children first so that they can live happier and fuller lives than we have because that is what development or modernization is supposed to be. We should use our comparative advantages because every Ugandan has something to offer in this post-2011 elections liberation struggle that has just begun. Furthermore, we should be pragmatic and not idealistic.

Uganda’s problems are relatively easy to fix

Studies of improving well-being in urban and rural areas have underscored the importance of ethics, morality and spirituality. Some commentators have observed that sustainable moral rules which are nearly universal as rules of the game date from hunter-gatherers experience. These rules have been undermined by demands of modernity including the profit motive. The destruction of ecosystems has raised the moral issue and how we can reclaim those moral rules for the benefit of present and future generations.

Deforestation has been used as an example of the need to return to moral rules. When we cut a tree, the wood is used for many purposes including charcoal, housing construction etc. But the price we get from cutting down the tree is small compared to the value of the tree in respect of the environment. In the name of becoming rich we are felling large swathes of trees, leaving the ground bare and subject to soil erosion by rain water and wind. “We know that once nature shows its skeleton, the earth is gone, and it will take centuries to renew the forest…

Uganda’s problems are relatively easy to solve

Studies of improving well-being in urban and rural areas have underscored the importance of ethics, morality and spirituality. Some commentators have observed that sustainable moral rules which are nearly universal as rules of the game date from hunter-gatherers experience. These rules have been undermined by demands of modernity including the profit motive. The destruction of ecosystems has raised the moral issue and how we can reclaim those moral rules for the benefit of present and future generations.

Deforestation has been used as an example of the need to return to moral rules. When we cut a tree, the wood is used for many purposes including charcoal, housing construction etc. But the price we get from cutting down the tree is small compared to the value of the tree in respect of the environment. In the name of becoming rich we are felling large swathes of trees, leaving the ground bare and subject to soil erosion by rain water and wind. “We know that once nature shows its skeleton, the earth is gone, and it will take centuries to renew the forest…