Let us remove Museveni from power peacefully

Change of government in Uganda has been violent – in 1966, 1971, 1979, 1985 and 1986. In 2011 the change of government should be peaceful. But why do we need a change now? Here are some compelling reasons.

1. Museveni was groomed in the early 1980s and imposed on Uganda by powerful western powers to serve their interests in the Greater Lakes region and not those of Ugandans.

2. Museveni waged a destructive guerrilla war with backing of foreigners – some 25 percent of guerrillas were Batutsi from Rwanda who ran the country until they left for Rwanda in 1994 and took our national security secrets with them making Uganda vulnerable. Some still hold key positions in strategic public institutions and business sector and will continue to do so as long as Museveni is in power. Uganda’s economy is in foreign hands – even the strategic post office!

3. Museveni has treated Uganda and Ugandans as conquered territory and people. Since 1986, he has openly despised us as primitive, bankrupt, empty cans, lazy and drunkards not only at home but abroad as well including in the United Nations General Assembly Hall where 192 heads of state and government meet every year in September.

How Museveni is changing the face of Uganda

Museveni came to power with a hidden long term plan: to change Uganda’s human and natural landscape beyond recognition. The plan is embedded in his philosophy of metamorphosis which Ugandans interpreted wrongly to mean agricultural, industrial and technological revolution.

To divert attention while mobilizing mass support Museveni presented a carefully drafted and broadly supported ten-point program which won him support mostly in central and western regions. Museveni knew he would discard the program (as well as those who drafted it) because it did not fit into the neo-liberal ideological framework of market forces and laissez faire capitalism and the interests of those foreigners who funded, provided media and political cover during the guerrilla war.

However, because of pressure from some of his supporters, Museveni delayed implementation of structural adjustment until 1987. The minister of finance and governor of central bank and many others who opposed shock therapy adjustment were dismissed or marginalized. The period between 1987 and 1989 was devoted to winning over many other dissenting voices because the strong bitterness of adjustment had been tasted under Obote 11 regime between 1981 and 1983.

A message to voters in Rujumbura constituency

Next month (February 2011) you will exercise your right and elect a president, a member of parliament and district councilors for the next five years. The purpose of elections is to choose people that will represent the interests of all the people in their respective constituencies through for example building schools (and providing school lunches), hospitals and clinics, constructing roads, providing affordable energy, improving agriculture, storage and processing facilities. Representatives should implement development promises they make during campaigning time. When a representative does not deliver as promised he/she should not be re-elected.

Like other constituencies in Uganda, Rujumbura has had elections since 1961. For most of the time (some 95 percent) Rujumbura has been represented in parliament by Bashambo clan of Bahororo people.

By way of background information, Bahororo are Batutsi from Rwanda (not Bahima as previously thought. There are no Bahima in Rujumbura) who came to Rujumbura around 1800 as refugees when Bahima overran their short-lived Mpororo kingdom (after it had disintegrated) in present-day Ntungamo district. In collaboration with Arab slave traders who came with superior European weapons, Bahororo managed to defeat and enslave, exploit and marginalize Bantu people they found in the area. Bantu people who were dubbed Bairu (which means slaves) lost their short horn cattle and industrial enterprises. They were reduced to cultivators growing food for and providing free labor to the new masters in a master/serf relationship as existed in pre-colonial Rwanda and medieval Europe. Punishments were severe to prevent rebellions or when they occurred.

Bahororo women are destroying Bairu nation

Readers who are not used to this kind of exchange might be disturbed. However, if you have an open mind you will overcome it once you understand the tricks Bahororo are using to keep Bairu down and by extension the rest of Uganda. I know there are some Bairu who will object to this kind of conversation in large part because they are benefiting from Museveni regime and do not want trouble.

The primary objective of writing this and other stories is not to make friends (it will be good if that happens) but to share my research findings with a wider public. I have tried to be as factual and as balanced as possible because I know that any story about the relationship between Bahororo and Bairu is bound to be controversial and emotional. If you do not agree challenge me with facts and not emotions. We are not going to let a whole nation be destroyed because we do not want to upset a few people.

How Museveni is silently turning Uganda into another Ivory Coast

It has been reported that migrant workers have triumphed over indigenous population in Ivory Coast’s presidential and parliamentary elections – essentially taking over the country. Museveni in collaboration with or under the direction of foreign advisers is methodically, silently and incrementally turning Uganda into another Ivory Coast. This is being done by increasing migrants through favorable policies and reducing indigenous population through birth control measures. I have already written an article (posted on home page of www.kashambuzi.com) arguing that immigrants will soon outnumber indigenous Ugandans. Let us see how Museveni is doing it beginning with policies that are encouraging foreigners to enter Uganda under conditions that are not clear to the public.

First, Museveni’s decision to adopt the shock therapy version of structural adjustment or economic recovery in 1987 was not an accident. It was designed to introduce unpopular decisions quickly before opposition groups organized to resist them. They also required dictatorial methods of governance which have been tacitly endorsed by Museveni’s foreign backers and conveniently described as bold leadership.

Principal characteristics of Bahororo people

A teacher determines the popularity of a topic by the number of questions asked, comments made and clarifications sought during and after the class. I have written over four hundred articles on Uganda and other states in the Great Lakes region. These articles are posted on www.kashambuzi.com which I urge you to visit free of charge. The article on Bahororo has been the most popular in terms of questions asked, clarifications sought and comments made. Some readers including Ahmed Katerega have asked me to write more on the subject. My focus has been and hopefully will continue to be about the behavior and not the individuals as such. Since Bahororo have been in power for 25 years try and compare what I am writing with what you are observing on the ground and let us compare notes as and when appropriate. I come from Rujumbura where Bantu/Bairu people have interacted with Nilotic Bahororo people for 210 years – since 1800.

Who are Bahororo – Revisited ?

I have received many requests to elaborate on what I have written or posted on my blog www.kashambuzi.com about Bahororo. While many people have some ideas about Bahima and Batutsi, they are not sure who Bahororo are, how they are related to Bahima and Batutsi and how and when they entered Uganda. This brief will try to provide a clarification. But first let me summarize the relationship between Bahororo on the one hand and Bahima, Batutsi and Banyamulenge on the other hand.

1. It is now established that Bahororo, Bahima and Batutsi have a common Nilotic and Luo-speaking ancestry. The Nilotic Luo-speaking people entered Uganda from Bahr el Ghazel in southern Sudan with long horn cattle. It is not clear what caused them to move. However, conflict with Dinka people (whom they resemble) over grazing land and water has been mentioned as a contributing factor. They crossed the Nile in phases into the grasslands further south. In Bunyoro, Toro and Buganda the Nilotic cattle herders mixed extensively with Bantu speaking people and formed new communities based on mixed farming of cattle herding, crop cultivation and some manufacturing largely of iron products. They adopted Bantu language.

If Museveni is reelected Uganda’s future will get worse

Many Ugandans and some non-Ugandans especially from the great lakes region believe – rightly or wrongly – that Museveni will do everything to get reelected to avoid being dragged to the International Criminal Court (ICC) on allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. He will also ensure that he gets over two-thirds of NRM candidates elected so that Parliament rubber stamps his decisions. Then the following will likely occur as mentioned in conversations so far.

1. The defeated Ugandans will adopt a passive resistance strategy that will further cripple the economy that is already in bad shape with over 55 percent of Ugandans living below the poverty line.

2. Museveni will basically retain his present core cabinet of ‘yes men and women’ who will continue to tell him what he wants to hear. He will likely create a new ministry of petroleum or expand the current ministry of energy and appoint one of his closest relatives turning oil revenue from a savior to a curse for Ugandans.

Adjustment and anti-terrorism policies have saved Museveni presidency

First and foremost, Museveni is president of Uganda to advance his own interests. In true democratic sense Museveni is not popular because of corruption and sectarianism as can be deduced from elite and peasant comments. He has used a combination of security forces, impoverishing Ugandans and collaborating with western powers in structural adjustment and anti-terrorism – areas that are not popular in the Horn and Great Lakes regions – to stay in power.

When structural adjustment ran out of steam in Ghana, the experiment was transferred to Uganda in 1987. Museveni adopted the extreme version (shock therapy) of structural adjustment favored by western sponsors the implementation of which required an authoritarian leader who would not tolerate riots. Museveni was also needed in great lakes geopolitics that resulted in changing governments in Rwanda in 1994 and in Zaire in 1997.

In return Museveni was saved from early multi-party politics which were imposed on others, allowed to strangle pre-independence Uganda Peoples’ Congress (UPC) and Democratic Party (DP), received huge amounts of money and training for his security forces and consolidated military, economic and political power in his hands. He threatened Ugandans that he would go back to the bush and cause another hell if not elected president in 1996. Most development partners did not raise a finger when all these things were happening because they did not want to upset a reliable ally.

Time has come to rewrite Africa’s great lakes history

Since the leaked report alleging that Rwanda and Uganda troops committed genocide against Rwanda and DR Congo Hutu in DRC, Rwanda’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation and government spokesperson Hon. Louise Mushikiwabo has been talking negatively and discouragingly about rewriting the history of Africa’s great lakes region. In contrast, many believe that the region is and has been unstable precisely because the history of the region was not properly written.

Influenced by European race theories that put a black person at the bottom of the race pyramid and the white person at the top, aristocratic explorers, missionaries and colonial officials in the great lakes region (Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi) credited all the magnificent civilizations they found in the region to Bahima and their Batutsi and Bahororo (Batutsi from Rwanda) cousins whom they described as ‘white’ people who got lost in the region and turned dark because of tropical sunshine. Further, they described them as intelligent, physically attractive and born leaders to indefinitely rule others in the region. On the other hand, Bantus or Negroes (especially Bahutu and Bairu) were described as a race of ugly and unintelligent human beings without leadership qualities and only fit for menial work. They were denied the civilizations they had developed in a region that had been described as part of the ‘Dark Continent’ without a history and civilization.